Dáil Éireann

Vol. 702 Thursday, No. 1 11 February 2010

DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

DÁIL ÉIREANN

TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)

Thursday, 11 February 2010.

Request to move Adjournment of Dáil under Standing Order 32 ……………… 1 Order of Business ……………………………… 2 Multilateral Carbon Credit Fund: Motion ……………………… 20 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage (resumed) …………………………… 20 Referral to Select Committee ………………………… 48 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage ………………… 48 Ceisteanna — Questions Minister for Health and Children Priority Questions …………………………… 64 Other Questions …………………………… 75 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 86 Adjournment Debate Cancer Screening Programme ………………………… 86 Deportation Orders …………………………… 89 Garda Stations ……………………………… 92 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 95 DÁIL ÉIREANN

DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL OFFICIAL REPORT

Imleabhar 702 Volume 702

Déardaoin, 11 Feabhra 2010. Thursday, 11 February 2010.

————

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

————

Paidir. Prayer.

————

Request to move Adjournment of Dáil under Standing Order 32. An Ceann Comhairle: Before coming to the Order of Business I propose to deal with a number of notices under Standing Order 32. I will call on Deputies in the order in which they submitted their notices to my office.

Deputy James Bannon: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, the appalling situation for the people of this country, in particular social welfare recipients who have been denied their entitlements. Farmers have been denied their agricultural grants and the elderly their pensions and medical cards, business people are crippled by service charges and levies, parents seek medical attention for sick children, students await maintenance grants, etc, while parliamentary questions of the utmost importance are returned to Deputies unanswered due to the forced industrial action taken by lower and middle income civil servants in defence of their incomes.

Deputy Pádraic McCormack: That is a serious matter.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

Deputy Pádraic McCormack: The Ceann Comhairle must allow that.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: No wonder George Lee took flight. 1 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: There is an economics position available on the opposite side.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle: We shall hear another Deputy. Is Deputy Pat Breen present? No, he is not. Having considered the matter raised I do not consider it to be in order under Standing Order 32.

Order of Business. The Tánaiste: It is proposed to take No.13, motion re proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the terms of an agreement between Ireland and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development on participation in the multilateral carbon credit fund, back from committee; No.22, Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad] — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 1, Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 [Seanad] — Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No.13 shall be decided without debate.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is the proposal for dealing with No. 13 agreed?

Deputy Alan Shatter: Before we can agree to that I have a question for the Tánaiste. Will she attend the House later today, and will the Government make time to detail to the House what this State’s approach will be at the very important conferences taking place today concerning the difficulties of Greece? The impact of the economic and fiscal crisis in Greece could have profound implications across the eurozone and there are profound implications for the zone’s currency of which we are part. This House has no knowledge of the approach of the Government, its policy or any proposals it may make. In the context of a very deep crisis which will impact across the eurozone it is appropriate that we should know where the Government stands and what proposals it will bring forward. Will the Tánaiste confirm that the Government will order, as a matter of priority, a report to this House next week on the result of the meetings taking place today, and that there will be an opportunity for Members to debate whatever communiqué is issued today and whatever policies are adopted by the Heads of State?

Deputy Joan Burton: On the same issue, my party would welcome an opportunity to debate in the House the nature of the Government policy towards the financial crisis in Europe. It is important that our Government should set out a position supporting the recovery of weaker countries in Europe from the current difficulties in the financial markets, especially because this country, in particular our banking system, has benefited to a very significant extent by support from the European Central Bank. The Heads of State who are attending the meeting with Mr.van Rompuy are to be accompanied by one aide only. We have not heard——

An Ceann Comhairle: We are getting into inappropriate detail.

Deputy Joan Burton: ——who will be the person representing Ireland.

An Ceann Comhairle: This is inappropriate for the Order of Business.

Deputy Joan Burton: We have heard no exposition of what the Irish position will be other than that the new Irish Commissioner, who will be attending the meeting, said today she was 2 Order of 11 February 2010. Business not free to comment and that it was a matter for the Taoiseach. We do not know who will accompany the Taoiseach.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy, please. We are going into unnecessary detail.

Deputy John Cregan: Are you available, Joan?

Deputy Joan Burton: It used to be our Minister for Foreign Affairs but that is no longer the case and the description in the information from the EU concerning the meeting states merely “one aide”. We do not know what position our country will bring to the meeting in respect of the financial crisis in Europe. On a related matter, there is as yet no revised plan from the Government in regard to NAMA but it is clear to everybody that the financial plan for NAMA produced in this House some months ago has been completely washed away——

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is out of order.

Deputy Joan Burton: ——by the fact that property values are far lower than even the Government had anticipated they would be.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I support Deputy Shatter’s request that the Tánaiste provide an opportunity for the House to discuss the economic crisis in Greece and how it will impact on other member states. I am very conscious also of the prospective realities that will present if the European Central Bank rate starts to increase——

A Deputy: Or if we give up NAMA.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: ——leaving a second tranche of people in great difficulty with mortgage repayments

Deputy Joe Costello: Send them NAMA.

An Ceann Comhairle: May we have some attention for the Deputy in possession please?

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: The prospect of the emerging recovery in Germany and France and the likelihood of the European Central Bank increasing its base rate at some point during the course of the months ahead will have a huge negative impact on many mortgage holders’ families in this State. We need to address this and consider what, if any, impact we can have as a collective European zone area within the ECB decision making process. I ask that this issue be accommodated.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is going into too much detail on the Order of Business.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Yesterday, I asked the Taoiseach on the Order of Business if he would arrange for the Ceann Comhairle to host an opportunity in the House to address the serious situation regarding the signalled loss of 750 jobs in Halifax Bank, the Bank of Scotland (Ireland) institution in this State, with the resultant closure of a branch network across the jurisdiction.

An Ceann Comhairle: I remind the Deputy we are on the Order of Business.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: This is a reasonable question. Will the Tánaiste accommodate an opportunity for the House to address this matter with her, as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, and with the Minister for Finance? This debate would take place 3 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

[Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.] againSt the backdrop of the likelihood of there being even more job losses within the overall banking sector among ordinary workers in those institutions.

The Tánaiste: This is an informal Council which will follow the normal procedures of an informal Council. There is no change in procedure. As we all know, we have a greater opportunity at informal Councils to have political conversations on issues. I assure Members that the normal format of an informal Council is proceeding. It would not be opportune today to discuss what is on the agenda of the informal Council. However, although it is not the norm after an informal Council to make statements to the House — that usually happens after spring Council — I will, in the context of the serious issues that will be raised, speak to the Taoiseach with regard to providing an opportunity next week to discuss the outcome of the deliberations. It is important to point out, as was stated by many Heads of State last night, that we will be very supportive of our partners within the European Union because it is only through solidarity that all members of the Union will be in a position to have economic stability, sustainability and economic growth.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I seek an assurance on this important issue.

An Ceann Comhairle: I need a decision on the proposal. We cannot have further elaboration on the matter. I allowed considerable latitude and the Tánaiste replied.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I seek clarification of her response. The Tánaiste said this is an informal Council. One of the principles behind the Lisbon treaty was to bring transparency to European Union business. Rather than the Tánaiste simply saying she will request of the Taoiseach that there be statements to the House next week, will she confirm to the House that there will be such statements? Will she also convey to the Taoiseach that one of the issues that should be discussed at this informal Council meeting today is the importance of greater discipline in the European Union countries with regard to compiling economic data?

An Ceann Comhairle: I will not allow Deputy Shatter to broaden the debate on this matter. I allowed considerable latitude earlier.

Deputy Alan Shatter: If there was greater discipline, many countries, including Ireland, would not be in the difficulties they are in. The House is entitled to an assurance that it will have statements. This meeting is being discussed on every radio and television station.

An Ceann Comhairle: Yes, and we have had contributions from all of the principal Oppo- sition parties.

Deputy Alan Shatter: If the Government will not provide clarity today on its approach to this crucial issue, which affects this State and Greece and may affect other European Union States, we are entitled to know there will, at least, be statements in the House next week and to be assured of that. I want that assurance from the Tánaiste. If we do not get that assurance, we will vote on the Order of Business. May we have that assurance from the Tánaiste?

An Ceann Comhairle: I want to move on to the proposal.

The Tánaiste: If the Deputy wants to act like a spoiled child, that is fine. I do not believe the eloquence of this House will add much to what will be discussed at the Council meeting, because it has not even started. I indicated that in normal circumstances we do not have statements after an informal Council meeting. We are now in a post-Lisbon situation and in that context I gave an undertaking that through the Whips the Government would, if it is feasible, 4 Order of 11 February 2010. Business have statements following the informal Council meeting. It is appropriate to allow the business of the House to be discussed by the Whips and it is they who will determine what time can be made available on the basis of the availability of people to speak.

Deputy Alan Shatter: It is the Government that controls the business of the House. Question, “That the proposal for dealing with No. 13, without debate, be agreed to,” put and declared carried.

Deputy Alan Shatter: With regard to the legislative programme and Bills expected to be published and in the context of the ongoing banking crisis, will the Tánaiste indicate when the Central Bank Bill will finally be published? This has been promised for over 12 months, but there is no sign of it coming into the House. This is crucial legislation for the restructuring of the Central Bank and the Financial Services Authority of Ireland. In the context of the crisis we are in the midSt of, there is no excuse for the delay on this legislation. In a similar vein, when will we see the company law consolidation and reform Bill? This is essential legislation, but it is only on the “B” list We have been told the heads have been agreed and the Bill is being drafted. Will both of these Bills be published before Easter?

The Tánaiste: The question on the Central Bank Bill was answered yesterday in the House. The heads of the Central Bank Bill were agreed by Cabinet on Tuesday and drafting of the Bill is proceeding. It is proposed the Bill will be available before Easter. The company law consolidation and reform Bill is a huge piece of legislation and I will not be in a position to bring it to the House before Easter. It will be introduced in the final quarter of the year.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Those of us who were privileged to be in this House in July 1990 will always remember the occasion when Nelson Mandela addressed the House. Today, on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of his release, it is appropriate to remember a man who persevered all his life for what he believed in pursuit of the rights of his people, who suffered enormously for his beliefs and made such a difference to the world and his country. Yesterday the Taoiseach told me the first the Government heard of the job losses in Bank of Scotland (Ireland) was when the Tánaiste’s Department was notified of the redundancies, but he did not seem to know if anybody had ever talked to people from the Bank of Scotland about measures that might save the jobs. As line Minister with responsibility for employment, has the Tánaiste had any contact with the Bank of Scotland with a view to saving jobs in the bank here? With regard to another matter connected to the Tánaiste’s Department, one of the newspapers this morning reported that the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment produced a report on the FÁS science challenge programme. The Tánaiste will recall this was the programme which gave occasion for so many FÁS executives and Ministers to travel to Florida. The programme apparently cost €7.8 million. I note the headline in the Irish Independent described it as a “waste of space”.

An Ceann Comhairle: This really should be the subject of a Parliamentary Question.

Deputy John Cregan: It is the Order of Business, not Leaders’ Questions.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is the difficulty. We do not have provision for Leaders’ Questions on a Thursday morning, or even for Question Time.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: In what respect am I out of order, a Cheann Comhairle?

An Ceann Comhairle: It is promised business, legislation—— 5 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: It is a report commissioned by a Department. If the Ceann Comh- airle had waited, he would have heard the question, which is to ask the Tánaiste when that report will be laid before the House, which is perfectly in order.

An Ceann Comhairle: Ar agaidh leat.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I know the Tánaiste has many reports crossing her desk and I wanted to describe the nature of the report so that she would be able to give me an accurate reply. When will the report we have read about this morning in the Irish Independent, which was obtained by that newspaper under freedom of information provisions and which concerns the waste of space, the €7.8 million spent on the space challenge programme and all the trips to Florida, be laid before the House? The third matter I want to raise with the Tánaiste concerns a matter pursued by Deputy Róisín Shortall in the Joint Committee on Health and Children in the past couple of days and about which Deputy Jan O’Sullivan will table a motion before that committee, namely, the utterly dysfunctional nature of the processing of medical cards for over 70s, which was centralised.

Deputy Seán Barrett: It is disgraceful.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: It has become utterly dysfunctional and, apparently, the HSE now has a proposal that will centralise all of the processing of medical cards. This is removing the access people have to local offices to pursue their application, and sometimes maybe talk with the official dealing with it——

An Ceann Comhairle: We are straying from the Order of Business.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: ——by sending it into some centralised office. My colleague, Deputy Jan O’Sullivan, is tabling a motion for the health committee that there should be no further centralisation of medical card processing until the health committee has an opportunity to examine the dysfunctionality which is already evident in the dealing with the over 70s medical cards. Will the Government agree to that motion and agree there will be no further centralisation of the medical cards? While I am on that subject, following an article in yesterday’s The Irish Times, is it true that HSE directors will get an increase of 5.5%, as reported?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is abusing the Order of Business.

Deputy Michael Ring: Of course, they are. Why would they not? They are doing a great job.

Deputy Joan Burton: The L’Oréal principle.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Shatter.

Deputy Alan Shatter: On the same subject, does the Tánaiste agree that what is happening in regard to medical cards at present is a complete shambles? Will she arrange with the Taoiseach and the line Minister that this decision previously made be revoked and that people seeking medical cards have their applications processed with proper speed? On the second issue raised, while mentioning FÁS, perhaps the Tánaiste will tell us why six of the people she recently appointed to the FÁS board — or certainly a portion of the six she directly appointed who did not officially apply to be on it, so far as we understand — all seem to have political connections? 6 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy John Cregan: We are on the Order of Business.

An Ceann Comhairle: Yes, we are on the Order of Business.

The Tánaiste: I am surprised that the Deputy reads the Irish Daily Mail. I would not have thought it was one of the newspapers on his list in the morning.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The Tánaiste would be surprised what I read.

The Tánaiste: Although well outside the remit of the Order of Business, I would like to answer a number of the points. On the issue of Halifax, the Taoiseach indicated that we were officially notified. A letter was handed in to my Department officially, indicating that under the collective redundancy side of the Redundancy Payments Act a decision was made by Bank of Scotland that it was letting go 750 people and was removing the retail side of its banking. It is important to note that it will retain 850 people in this country. The company also advised the Taoiseach’s office of its decision similarly. That is the official notification. It is important to say that the bank has been in discussions with the Department of Finance for a considerable period of time, whereby it was facilitated in the best way possible in looking at alternatives to this decision. Unfortunately, however, following on from those considerations, it was not in a position to continue with the banking facilities it provided in this country. On my involvement, I spoke to some senior people in the bank yesterday. It is now a process of discussion with the unions. They have advised me and I have made available to them my personal time, at any time, to discuss any issues that may arise, as I have done and will continue to do for any company. I have received assurances, as the Minister with responsibility for consumer affairs, that the consumers who will be affected in this will be fully informed and that they will continue to have services made available to them from the bank. On the next issue, I asked for an internal review of the science challenge in December 2008. That review was completed in April last year and, following on from my receipt of that document, I closed down the science challenge immediately. All existing commitments have been met and the programme has been closed. As the Deputy knows, a new board has been appointed on the basis of experience and expertise——

Deputy Alan Shatter: Our party has had an impact.

Deputy Dick Roche: It used all the scare tactics it used on Mr. Lee in recent days.

The Tánaiste: ——on the basis that corporate governance issues have been addressed in the context of a considerable amount of work that has been done by the director general and the temporary director general, as well as the previous board. All of these issues have been dealt with. The Committee of Public Accounts is continuing its deliberations on this matter. The board met for the first time yesterday, for a considerable period of time, to consider the future of FÁS and the need to ensure it turns itself around and is very much ad idem with the needs of those who are unemployed in this country.

Deputy Alan Shatter: How many of the six appointed by the Tánaiste had party affiliations?

The Tánaiste: For the Deputy’s benefit, I appointed all of the members of the board.

Deputy Alan Shatter: There were six who were on the Tánaiste’s recommendation entirely. 7 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

The Tánaiste: Many people — some 270 — applied for consideration. Several people who applied for consideration have also been appointed. It is important to say——

Deputy Alan Shatter: How many who did not apply got appointed because of party affiliations?

An Ceann Comhairle: Order, Deputy Shatter.

The Tánaiste: If Deputy Shatter has any interest, I would be more than happy to answer a Parliamentary Question on that.

Deputy Alan Shatter: There were six of them.

Deputy Terence Flanagan: Six out of six.

The Tánaiste: It is important to say that the chairman and the board are working to ensure that FÁS finds itself in the position in which it should be——

Deputy Alan Shatter: One Green and five Fianna Fáilers.

The Tánaiste: ——which is to have a reputation as the best State training facility in this country.

Deputy Pádraic McCormack: Not very successfully.

The Tánaiste: The Deputy worked very closely with FÁS in his own day-to-day business and he knows of the calibre, in particular, of the people in the front line. It is not a slur on those people either. On the issue of the medical cards, this was answered yesterday.

Deputy Pádraic McCormack: Get FÁS to deal with it.

The Tánaiste: There are difficulties, as the Minister indicated. I am sure the Deputy will raise these issues in the context of her deliberations within the committee. It is clearly the intention of the HSE that the way in which the services will be delivered will be in the most efficient and effective way, on the basis that we have very scarce resources and it is a way in which we can reduce costs and bring in efficiencies——

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: It clearly will not do that.

The Tánaiste: On the final issue that was raised in regard to senior management grades, the Minister has not made any determination on that matter. As a final comment and to agree with the Deputy, I was here in 1990 when Nelson Mandela came to the House. There are many celebrations, as we know, and the calibre of the man and what he brought to his people in South Africa is certainly worth celebrating and making public comment on this afternoon.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I thank the Tánaiste for being more forthcoming in reply to the question about Halifax than the Taoiseach was yesterday.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy will have to find another way to elaborate on this. I will allow a very brief observation. 8 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

11 o’clock Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I am obliged. The question I was pursuing yesterday with the Taoiseach is what efforts the Government has made or is making to save the jobs at Halifax and in respect of the people who have mortgages with that bank. I made the point that in many cases these are 100% mortgages, some of which might now be more exposed than would otherwise be the case. The Tánaiste has confirmed that the Government knew some time ago what Halifax had in mind. While official notification in this regard only came in the day before yesterday the Government knew about it. Perhaps the Tánaiste will tell the House what efforts the Government or she has made to save jobs at Halifax and to address the needs of the people who hold mortgages with that company.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask the Tánaiste to give a brief reply as this is not Question Time.

The Tánaiste: It is not appropriate to speak on the floor of the House about discussions that took between the Department of Finance, Financial Regulator and the bank.

Deputy Seán Barrett: Why not?

The Tánaiste: The situation was worked through by the Department in the context of——

Deputy Seán Barrett: It is not a secret that 750 people are going to lose their jobs.

The Tánaiste: ——the difficulties the bank had in this country——

Deputy Seán Barrett: We need a banking system.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Barrett please allow the Tánaiste to reply without interruption.

The Tánaiste: ——and on the basis of the restructuring that is taking place in the banking sector worldwide. On the issue of mortgage holders——

Deputy Seán Barrett: What is all the secrecy about?

The Tánaiste: ——Halifax mortgage holders did not interact at retail level but with a customer care support section of the bank and this will continue. Anyone experiencing difficulty will receive support from the bank’s customer care support service with whom they have always interacted. I have been given an assurance by Halifax that it will be, as indicated by the Taoiseach, contacting all its customers to ensure any supports necessary are provided forthwith.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I do not wish to be vexatious a Cheann Comhairle, but as that issue has been raised I would like to make a brief comment. I reject the Tánaiste’s notion that it is inappropriate to discuss the matter on the floor of this House. I raised the matter yesterday with the Taoiseach and again this morning asked the Tánaiste, who has not yet replied to my question, if this matter in regard to Halifax will be addressed here and if she will report to the House the efforts she and the Government has made, in terms of engagement with Halifax, to save the jobs of 750 employees and their dependants.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy can raise this issue at the Whips’ meeting.

Deputy Seán Barrett: This is to do with the citizen’s of the State who have no banking system.

9 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: It is important that this is done. It is also important in the context of not alone trying to save these jobs but of saving countless hundreds of other jobs within that sector. I ask the Tánaiste to join with me in wishing Muscular Dystrophy Ireland every success with its information day on Sunday 14 February 2010, a date people will associate with something else entirely. However, this weekend Muscular Dystrophy Ireland will be promoting its information day. It is important that this matter be referred to here and given the oxygen of publicity and attention by the media from this morning. I ask the Tánaiste to indicate that the Govern- ment will take on board the result of the report of the survey of all those with muscular dystrophy throughout the country and their families as they cope——

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy will have to find an alternative way of dealing with this matter.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: ——and that it will take on board the salient recommendations and act appropriately. My final question relates to promised legislation. I preface my question by commending the Joint Committee on Health and Children on its publication yesterday of its second report on primary care in the community, a fine report on which much excellent work has been done. The report which was launched yesterday highlights the disgracefully under-resourced primary care centre roll-out to which the Government is supposedly committed. Real action on the part of Government is required. The report highlights two pieces of legislation——

An Ceann Comhairle: Does the Deputy have a question on promised legislation?

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I am asking if the Government will take on board the urging of an all-party Oireachtas committee in regard to the health information Bill and the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill, both of which I have inquired about and pressed for over a considerable period. These Bills have been repeatedly delayed by the Department of Health and Children. There appears to be no willingness on the part of Government to grapple with the importance of both pieces of legislation. Mention was made earlier of medical cards. The eligibility for health and personal social services Bill——

Deputy John Cregan: This is ridiculous.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Ó Caoláin is completely out of order.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: It is imperative the eligibility for health and personal social services Bill is introduced.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call on the Tánaiste for a brief reply.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: On the last issue raised by Deputy Ó Caoláin——

An Ceann Comhairle: I will come back to the Deputy. The list of Members’ wishing to raise queries is lengthy.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: The eligibility for health and personal social services Bill is crucial——

Deputy John Cregan: Ridiculous questions. 10 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: ——in terms of the primary care teams being able to work properly, which was a major recommendation of the report launched yesterday. I support Deputy Ó Caoláin on that matter. Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle will come back to me later on the other issues I wish to raise.

An Ceann Comhairle: Yes. I call on the Tánaiste to reply.

The Tánaiste: The health information Bill will be introduced in the middle of this year. No date has yet been fixed in respect of the other legislation.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Durkan.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: There are three issues I wish to raise. Promised legislation is respect of——

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: The word “ridiculous” was used by a Member on the opposite side in the context of the questions I asked. I say to that Member that the only thing that is ridiculous——

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Ó Caoláin, please.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: ——is the ludicrous response of the Tánaiste and representatives of this Government on this most important issue.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask the Deputy to show some respect for the order of the House.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: It is ridiculous a Cheann Comhairle.

Deputy Dick Roche: Would it be out of order to note the nine interruptions from——

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Durkan to continue.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Perhaps Members of the Government benches will cease interrupting and allow me to get on with my questions. The issue of mortgage arrears has been repeatedly referred to. Legislation on this matter was promised in the House by the Minister during the passage of the NAMA legislation. What discussions have taken place since with a view to introducing legislation in this House to address the needs of people who are racking up mortgage arrears, many of whom are unemployed and have no possibility of tackling their problems. Perhaps the Tánaiste will address that question first.

The Tánaiste: The Taoiseach has indicated on a number of occasions that the Government is working through a legislative process in terms of devising a formula to deal with people who find themselves in difficulty with mortgages.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Can the Tánaiste indicate the timeframe involved?

The Tánaiste: No.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Time is running out.

An Ceann Comhairle: Does the Deputy have a second query on promised legislation?

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Another issue on which the Tánaiste might be able to update the House is the discussions that have taken place with the The Thalidomide Association of 11 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

[Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.] Ireland having particular regard to recent developments. Yesterday, the Taoiseach was asked——

An Ceann Comhairle: This matter was dealt with yesterday.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: It is a serious and urgent issue. I know that the Tánaiste will want to respond on the matter.

The Tánaiste: The Taoiseach indicated yesterday that the State’s claims agency is bringing a report to the Minister this month. There has been no change since yesterday.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: There was a request for a meeting with the Taoiseach or Mini- ster. My final question relates to unanswered parliamentary questions, which is an important and growing issue.

An Ceann Comhairle: I must stop the Deputy now.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I know what the Ceann Comhairle is going to say.

An Ceann Comhairle: This matter was is under consideration.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle will repeat what he said.

An Ceann Comhairle: This matter is under consideration.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Where?

An Ceann Comhairle: The matter was raised at a meeting yesterday of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and is under consideration.

Deputy Dara Calleary: The Deputy did not answer too many journalists’ questions.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask the Deputy to allow the matter to rest for the moment.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I am delighted to hear that. It may well suit Government to have rafts of parliamentary questions unanswered but it does not suit the Opposition.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Seán Power.

Deputy Seán Power: Two Members who are unable to be present in the House this morning for different reasons have asked me to raise some issues with the Tánaiste. The first is a question of behalf of Deputy Richard Bruton who is anxious to know if it is the Government’s intention to support the candidature of Ms Harriet Harman MP or if it will be putting forward its own candidate. Deputy Kenny has asked me to ask the Tánaiste——

Deputy Seán Barrett: The Deputy needs to look at the problems within his own party.

Deputy Seán Power: ——and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if there are any suitable FÁS courses——

Deputy Seán Barrett: There are enough problems on that side of the House that need sorting out. 12 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Power is out of order.

Deputy Seán Power: ——for someone looking to up their game.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Crawford.

Deputy Seán Barrett: Deputy Power is a smart ass and should look at the problems within his own party.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle: Will Deputies please refrain from interrupting? I call Deputy Crawford.

Deputy Seán Barrett: The Ceann Comhairle did not interrupt Deputy Seán Power on an issue that had nothing to do with the Order of Business.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Barrett is interrupting his party colleague.

Deputy Seán Barrett: The Ceann Comhairle did not interrupt him.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Barrett should refrain from interrupting the House. I call Deputy Crawford.

Deputy Seán Barrett: It is a disgrace the way the Ceann Comhairle is running this House. Medical cards cannot be mentioned.

Deputy Seymour Crawford: This Order of Business has reached a new low.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle: Let us keep it in order. Does the Deputy have a query on promised business or legislation?

Deputy Seymour Crawford: Absolutely. It is vital to discuss medical cards, home helps and related issues. There is no point in our seeking legislation that is on the B list, but I am referring to one on the A list regarding health. The nurses and midwives Bill will at least bring the Minister for Health and Children into this House and perhaps force her to answer some questions on the real problems of this country. A 94 year old man was refused payment for either home care or his home help.

An Ceann Comhairle: There are many other ways the Deputy can raise this matter.

Deputy Seymour Crawford: The social welfare Bill is on the A list, so when will it be brought before the House in order that we can have a full and frank discussion on these matters? They are a lot more important than those raised by the last speaker.

The Tánaiste: The nurses and midwives Bill has been agreed and will be in the House shortly. The social welfare Bill will be taken in this session.

Deputy Terence Flanagan: I wish to ask the Tánaiste about two items. The first is the National Property Services Regulatory Authority Bill, which is a bit of a mouthful. It is a crucial piece of legislation which will deal with the regulation of property management agents, auctioneers and letting agents. The Bill was four years in the making. 13 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Emmet Stagg: It was before the Deputy’s time.

Deputy Terence Flanagan: It has been before this House on two occasions, but was withdrawn. In the meantime an office was established in Navan, County Meath, which is another quango. To date, that office has incurred costs of €2 million, yet apartment owners have nobody to turn to concerning the problems they are experiencing on a daily basis, given the rip-off fees they are charged for management services. The Bill is currently before the Seanad and is interlinked with the Multi-Unit Development Bill. As Deputy Rabbitte said last week, however, it seems to be buried in the Seanad. Can the Tánaiste provide an update on when Committee Stage will be taken in the Seanad and when it will come before the Dáil? The second issue concerns Cadbury Ireland, which was raised on the Order of Business last week by Deputy Bruton. Can the Tánaiste say when she will be meeting the Kraft management in order to save the 1,200 jobs which are now under threat in Cadbury Ireland?

An Ceann Comhairle: I understand the legislation is in the Seanad.

The Tánaiste: Both Bills are in the Seanad. As regards the Multi-Unit Development Bill, the Taoiseach indicated that a considerable number of new amendments are to be introduced, but work is ongoing in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on that matter. On Cadbury Ireland, as I indicated last week, we are working closely with the company through the offices of Enterprise Ireland. When that work has been completed we will be meeting the management on the matter. I can speak to the Deputy privately about that.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: On the same matter, Deputy Terence Flanagan is wrong about one issue. This has been going on for eight years, not four.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I want to ask about the human tissue Bill. As the Tánaiste will know, Parents for Justice is an organisation representing parents of deceased children whose organs were taken from their bodies without permission. The organisation has been promised a response first to the Dunne report and then to the Madden report, but there is no indication of when this will happen. They are a particularly vulnerable group of parents who have been promised some response, but it has not been forthcoming. The Government should respond to them. I will keep asking about head shops until we get results. Legislation has been promised but has there been any progress in this regard? The Minister of State, Deputy Curran, was here earlier and I am sure he will have briefed the Tánaiste on whether there has been any progress on various aspects on this matter. Action may possibly be required under planning legislation and the Misuse of Drugs Act. Other legislation may also be needed. Has there been any progress in this regard? The issue has gone from Joe Duffy’s agenda, but it must stay on ours because young people’s lives are in danger.

The Tánaiste: I can assure the Deputy that the matter has not gone from our agenda, which is the most important one in the House. The Department is currently preparing regulations to be introduced. That is being done under the auspices of the Department of Health and Chil- dren. In addition, the Minister of State, Deputy John Curran, is examining other legislative options that may have to be introduced. The heads of the human tissue Bill have been circulated to Departments for their consideration. I will obtain an update for the Deputy as to when the Minister expects to bring it to Government. 14 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Liz McManus: Yesterday, the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources heard a powerful testimony from a group of coal miners. This small group comprises men who are sick, some dying, as a result of the work they did in harsh conditions to serve this country. They have never received redress.

An Ceann Comhairle: This is the Order of Business.

Deputy Liz McManus: I have a question which is absolutely legitimate. They raised the issue of reports that were, or should have been, prepared by the inspector of mines and quarries. This is based on a statutory requirement, a duty of care by the State to protect miners working from 1965 to 1989, before the Health and Safety office was established. Those records are not available.

An Ceann Comhairle: There are many other ways this matter could be raised, including on the Adjournment or by tabling a parliamentary question.

Deputy Liz McManus: I ask the Tánaiste to ensure that those reports are laid before the House in the interests of people who are now suffering severe ill health because of neglect by the State and the private mine owners. I urge her to do something practical that will make a real difference to the lives of these men.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I strongly support the sentiments expressed by Deputy McManus.

The Tánaiste: I have not had notice of what the Deputy was going to raise, so I will revert to her on that matter.

Deputy Joe Costello: Given what the Garda Síochána inspector has said about the reduction in the number of Garda stations, may I ask the Tánaiste——

An Ceann Comhairle: That is material for a parliamentary question.

Deputy Joe Costello: I am referring to a piece of legislation as well. There is a proposal for a substantial number of Garda stations to be closed throughout the country with all the repercussions that may have for communities. Will the Tánaiste confirm whether or not Fitzgibbon Street Garda station, in my own constituency, is going to close, and Mountjoy Garda station also?

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot expect the Tánaiste to have those details on the Order of Business.

Deputy Joe Costello: Item 17 is the criminal law (defence of life and property) Bill. Many lives and much property will be at stake concerning this matter and local communities are extremely concerned about the new proposals, which were originally proposed by former Mini- ster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell.

The Tánaiste: That legislation will be brought to Government soon and we hope to have it introduced quickly in the House.

Deputy Joan Burton: More than a week ago, the Minister for Finance advised the House that he was devolving a significant number of functions from his Department to the National Treasury Management Agency concerning the management and restructuring of banking in Ireland. He advised us that he was consulting the Attorney General with a view to placing an order before the House. In the context of the employment crisis—— 15 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is looking for details which we cannot expect to be available for the Order of Business.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: She is perfectly in order.

An Ceann Comhairle: There are so many other times on which these sort of matters can be raised.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: On a point of order, Deputy Burton is perfectly in order in asking about this particular matter. With respect, I do not think the Ceann Comhairle should interrupt her when she is perfectly in order. Second, I draw to the Ceann Comhairle’s attention that he repeatedly interrupts Deputy Burton every time she raises matters on the Order of Business.

An Ceann Comhairle: Okay. Can the Deputy summarise briefly?

Deputy Joan Burton: I thank the Ceann Comhairle and I appreciate his new approach. There is a crisis of employment in banking where a number of foreign banks are poised if they could to leave Ireland with consequent serious loss of employment in the banking sector as well as deleveraging and loss of employment in the six guaranteed banks. The Tánaiste is in charge of employment policy in the country. This is potentially a massive loss of employment in addition to what has happened to Halifax. Where are we now placed? In an earlier reply to the leader of the Labour Party, the Tánaiste said that the Department of Finance had been in some kind of detailed discussion about Halifax. Approximately ten days ago the Minister for Finance announced he is to devolve the management of banking and restructuring to the NTMA. He advised the House he was consulting the Attorney General with a view to creating an order in respect of this, which would be placed before the House. I get the impression that the Govern- ment is aimless and rudderless regarding the crisis of employment in banking.

An Ceann Comhairle: I have allowed the latitude.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Tánaiste is the line Minister responsible for employment. Does she have any idea when the Minister for Finance will resolve the issue as to who is in charge of looking at employment in the banking sector? What is happening regarding the Attorney General and the order to be placed before the House regarding responsibility for banking being significantly devolved to the NTMA as per the Minister for Finance?

The Tánaiste: Clearly there has been no determination as to when that order will be placed before the House. I gave an assurance as did the Minister that political responsibility will remain with the Minister for Finance. I have been working with the financial services sector and the union representatives since I was appointed as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. We are working at new opportunities in the context of the financial services sector. The financial services sector continues to remain very important to the country. Per capita we have the greatest presence in the financial services sector in the world. It will continue to be a very important asset in the creation and support of employment here.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Ring.

Deputy Joan Burton: With respect, this year we are on the brink of losing thousands of jobs.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy——

Deputy Joan Burton: The Tánaiste would not react on SR Technics or Waterford Glass.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is abusing the Order of Business. 16 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

Deputy Joan Burton: She has nothing to say about the 1,200 Cadbury jobs between Coolock and Kerry.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy——

Deputy Joan Burton: She has nothing to say on any of these and there are several thou- sand jobs——

An Ceann Comhairle: There are so many other ways the Deputy can raise these matters in the House, but not on the Order of Business.

Deputy Joan Burton: ——sold down the Suwannee and she has nothing to offer the House.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Ring.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: The Tánaiste did not implement one of the 20 recommendations of the report for the mid-west.

Deputy Joan Burton: Not only that, but——

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Burton please.

Deputy Joan Burton: ——matters like the regeneration in Limerick, which were meant to generate local employment in long-term black spots, have been abandoned.

The Tánaiste: If I am not going to be protected by the House from accusations that are thrown out lightly without the opportunity to give a full response——

Deputy Joan Burton: They are not accusations; they are facts.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Burton, please.

Deputy Joan Burton: If the Tánaiste wants to discuss the facts, I am happy to do so.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask the Deputy to resume her seat.

Deputy Michael Ring: I wish to raise three matters. When will the dormant accounts Bill be before the Dáil?

The Tánaiste: I am not completely incompetent.

Deputy Joan Burton: I did not say anything about the Tánaiste’s competence.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Burton, please. Deputy Ring is in possession.

Deputy Joan Burton: Perhaps it was a voice behind her.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Burton, please.

Deputy Joan Burton: I did hear the comment though. I think it came from behind the Tánaiste.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask Deputy Burton to refrain and allow Deputy Ring to speak.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Tánaiste talked to me and did not direct her remarks through the Chair. I did not comment on her competence. That is for others. 17 Order of 11 February 2010. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask for Deputy Burton’s co-operation.

Deputy Michael Ring: I wish to raise three matters. When will the dormant accounts Bill be before the House? When will the Údarás na Gaeltachta Bill be before the House? Will the Údarás elections proceed or is legislation required? I would hope the Bill will be before the House shortly because people need to know what is happening with the Údarás and what changes will take place. When will the Government sit down with the unions on the go-slow in the public sector? It is having a major effect on how this House works. While it does not matter about us, the affairs of the people on the ground are being affected. We cannot get replies to parliamentary questions to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs. This cannot continue. We need the Depart- ment to be working. It is time the Government and unions sat down to try to resolve the matter.

The Tánaiste: The dormant accounts Bill will be published later this year. Unfortunately there is no date on Údarás na Gaeltachta, but I shall get an update from the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, on the Deputy’s behalf. I appreciate what the Deputy is saying about the work to rule in the public sector. It is important to reiterate that the Government is open to discussions in the context of not just this issue but also reform of the Civil Service and the public sector. The Minister for Finance, as the public service employer, is more than open for consultation and discussions on the issue.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Government has put the Education for Persons with Special Edu- cational Needs Act into abeyance. I do not recall it happening before. There is a special school in my constituency in which the Minister has decided that 12 of the 17 SNAs must be made redundant by summer and the first batch of them by the middle of February. There are 90——

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should table a parliamentary question on the matter.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Perhaps I could prevail on the Ceann Comhairle to call me on the Adjournment on the matter. These 90 pupils with special needs in a school under great pressure are among the most vulnerable in our society. It is not appropriate to cut the number of SNAs from 17 to five and threaten to come back take out some of the teachers. Whatever we need to do in this environment of cuts, I suggest to the Tánaiste that we should protect the children with special needs.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is there any legislation in this area?

The Tánaiste: There is no legislation on the issue of SNAs. As we know there has been a review of the SNAs for some time. There has been no change in the criteria.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: The Government has just been sacking 1,200 SNAs.

The Tánaiste: The scheme has not changed and there has not been any change in the criteria. As the Deputy knows, we are all aware of issues that arise. I ask the Deputy to give me the name of the school so that I can facilitate a conversation with the Minister.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: It is St Joseph’s special school in Balrothery in Tallaght.

The Tánaiste: I am not the line Minister with responsibility for education. I believe the council met representatives of the school on 8 January. Apparently 90 children are enrolled and there has been a review where the school was unable to provide evidence or substantiate the eligibility of a substantial number of pupils. In normal circumstances this would lead to a 18 Order of 11 February 2010. Business reduction in SNA cover. However, the organisation, NCSE, is to work with the school on the development of a basis on which it can manage the issue. However, I can ask the Minister for Education and Science to get an update for the Deputy in the first instance.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I thank the Tánaiste for that. The Tánaiste’s note is out of date. A meeting took place yesterday and the redundancies are proceeding. I would be grateful if the Tánaiste should intercede with the Minister for Education and Science.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I wish to raise three issues. One issue was raised in the House some weeks ago relating to the redress legislation that provides for the making of compensation payments to the victims of institutional abuse. I understand that the Departments of Education and Science, and Justice, Equality and Law Reform have both accepted that the State was directly involved in women being sent to the Magdalene laundries where, as we know, many were very cruelly treated. Based on the fact that this is now accepted — I am aware it is a matter under consideration — does the Government intend to introduce an amendment to the Residential Institutions Redress Act to extend the redress board’s remit to provide for compensation payments to the women who suffered so greatly in the Magdalene laundries? Under the heading “Bills in respect of which heads have yet to be approved by Government” in the Government’s legislative programme, No. 75 is the family law Bill, which has been promised since the general election of May 2007. That Bill seeks to provide some additional protection for women, particularly, with regard to pensions. Given that Sunday next is St Valen- tine’s Day, and this Bill is designed to provide protection, essentially, to married women, is there any possibility the Government could give some priority to the publication of this legislation? We do not even have the heads of the Bill as yet. I will happily draft this Bill as a Private Members’ Bill in the space of 24 hours if the Government is willing to take on board the measures that are needed. What needs to be done in this area is not controversial, and has been known for a very long time. I ask the Tánaiste that priority be given to it. The Tánaiste might have been following the difficulties and troubles of the Irish women bobsleigh team in the Winter Olympics. The Australians and now the Brazilians have been trying to ensure that the Irish team does not compete. In the circumstances, the Government might, by way of démarche, make it known to the Brazilians that we should like them to back off. This House should wish the members of that team well in the Winter Olympics, which are starting this weekend.

Deputy Michael Ring: Hear, hear.

The Tánaiste: On the issue the Deputy raised on an amendment to the redress board, the Government has not finally considered this matter, on the basis that the Minister has yet to bring it to Cabinet. Draft heads are in preparation as regards the family law Bill, but have not been completed as of yet.

Deputy Mary Upton: I recently obtained some figures from the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews as part of a reply to a parliamentary question, regarding sports organisations and the vetting of employees and volunteers. Some of these were very good and indicated that a very high number had gone through the process, but quite a number had not. Will the Tánaiste say when the national vetting bureau Bill will be taken? A number of serious issues have arisen recently regarding animal welfare, particularly non- thoroughbred horses. Will the Tánaiste say when the animal health and welfare Bill will be?

19 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

The Tánaiste: With regard to the animal health and welfare Bill unfortunately no date has been finalised by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The vetting legislation will be introduced this year.

Deputy Brian O’Shea: Cén dul chun cinn atá déanta i leith na reachtaíochta atá geallta maidir le sainmhíniú nua ar cad is Gaeltacht ann agus ar teorainneacha na Gaeltachta, agus i leith na reachtáiochta atá geallta do Údarás na Gaeltachta? An éÚdarás na Gaeltachta nóÚdarásna Gaeilge a mbeidh i gceist?

The Tánaiste: Mar atá fhios ag an Teachta, tá tuarascáil á láinseáil ag an Aire fhéin. Sílim go raibh díospóireacht ins an gchomchoiste fosta, agus go raibh siad ag éisteacht le muintir na Gaeltachta fosta shíos i gContae na Gaillimhe. Ag éirigh as sin, i mo tuairimse, beidh dlíúros ár gcomhair. Tá siad ag caint faoi Údarás na Gaeilge taobh amuigh do Údarás na Gaeltachta atá ann ag an nóiméad seo, ach nílsé socraithe go fóill. ‘Sé an fá nach bfhuil sé socraithe go fóill ná nach bhful an Bille úr ach beagnach réidh. Nílandáta socraithe mar sin.

Multilateral Carbon Credit Fund: Motion. Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the terms of an AAU Authorisation Agreement (Green Carbon Fund) between Ireland and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Develop- ment on Ireland’s participation in the Multilateral Carbon Credit Fund (Green Carbon Fund), copies of which were laid before Dáil Éireann on 28th January, 2010.”

Question put and agreed to.

Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” An Ceann Comhairle: I call on Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin to resume. He has 18 minutes left in this slot.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Since I began my contribution on this Bill, I challenged the Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen, during Leaders’ Questions last week to rule out cuts to the statutory minimum wage. It was alarming that the Taoiseach failed to rule out such an attack on the lowest paid workers in our society. That is something that every political opinion, the wider public and in particular the trade union movement should note carefully. Instead, the Taoiseach attempted to justify the decision to exempt top civil servants from the full effects of pay cuts while lower paid public servants are punished. Last night the Government parties — I emphasise with all their Deputies in attendance — confirmed their support for the higher paid civil servants when they voted down the Private Members’ motion that sought to address the inequity of the Government’s approach. Following the savage budget cuts to wages, social welfare and public services, there were immediate calls from some representatives of business interests for a reduction in the minimum wage. This is exactly as trade unionists, Sinn Féin and others predicted, namely, that an attack on the wages of lower paid public service workers would lead to similar attacks on workers in the private sector. Now the Taoiseach has refused to rule out a further attack on the least well off. 20 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

The Taoiseach also defended the Government’s intention to table amendments to the Bill before the House, on Committee Stage, to allow employers to apply to the Labour Court for exemptions from the requirements of employment regulation orders, EROs, and registered employment agreements, REAs. For decades these orders and agreements have protected workers from exploitation and ensured there are agreed minimum rates of pay in industries across the economy. If these amendments are forced through, then we shall see pay rates across the economy driven down to the minimum wage level and below. It will see the statutory minimum wage rate being slashed by the Government. If that happens, the Government will go on to reduce social welfare rates further, using the argument that they are a disincentive to work. — an argument we have heard used, all too sadly, in the past Government policy is also encouraging profitable companies to lay off workers unnecessarily, as for example in Rye Valley Foods in County Monaghan or to impose unacceptable working conditions, as in Kingspan in County Cavan, both of which are in my constituency. A reversal of pay cuts for lower paid public servants must be put on the table if there is to be any hope of a resumption of social partnership negotiations. We need to see social partnership coming back, but only with the full realisation by Government and employers that the lower paid public servants must have those cuts reversed. In the talks before the budget the public service unions were prepared to agree sweeping changes in work practices that would have had major implications for workers in the health sector in particular. This was thrown away by the Government, which is clearly determined to drive forward with a low pay policy in the public and private sectors regardless of the consequences. It is claimed by some that the minimum wage and agreements on overtime for Sundays are responsible for the recession in certain sectors. However, if one examines wages in certain sectors, such as hospitality, one finds not only are they low in comparison to others, but also that they have not risen to the same extent as other sectors. One reason for this has been the falling off in the level of union organisation but another, without doubt, is the fact that a significant number of employers found means to circumvent legislation on wages and were able to employ people on rates and for working periods which made a mockery of the legislation. It is also a fact that the prices charged for accommodation, food and drink rose far quicker than wages and this ensured good returns were earned for their management teams and owners. It is not accurate, therefore, to claim that allegedly high wages are at fault for the subsequent falling off in business, nor should such a model be used to justify cutting wages and undermining work conditions as a means of stimulating economic growth. It is important not only that employers are obliged to comply with current agreements, but that a climate does not develop whereby a generalised claim of an inability to pay is used to justify agreements on wages that penalise workers. Unfortunately, experience informs us, and we see it again in several current disputes, that employers are able to ignore agreements and court orders and because of their relative strength, they are able to enforce cuts or ignore those agreements on the threat of closures or mass lay-offs. In that situation, workers are left with no option but to use their own strength and we are left in a situation of conflict in which the existing mechanisms are seen to be ineffective. However, the more employers flout those mechanisms and existing agreements, the less workers can be expected to have any real faith in the procedures. It is, therefore, crucial that when they are breached, the orders are enforced. Otherwise, measures such as those proposed here are powerless and ineffective. This is the concern expressed by the trade union movement, which has pointed out that the good parts of this legislation are called into question by the current Government’s attitude towards the trade unions and this was evidenced by the manner in which the Government, at 21 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.] the behest of the employers and a string of right-wing commentators, introduced the cuts in wages for public service workers. Government spokespersons continue to refer to the virtues of social partnership but their actions indicate this is only a convenient slogan to be trundled out when it suits them and, obviously, the same applies to public and private sector employers. The manner in which the Government treated the public service unions before Christmas and the refusal of several employers to abide by Labour Court rulings indicate this Government and the employers are intent on using the recession to force workers to accept pay cuts and poorer conditions of employment. This point should be repeated time and again. I challenge the Government to refute that both it and employers are intent on and are using the current recession to force workers to accept pay cuts. The Government should have paid heed to the repeated march and cry of the people outside the gates of this institution during the closing months of 2009. Workers will not accept those pay cuts or poorer conditions of employment. There is also a danger the provisions in this Bill will be emasculated in the same way as the Labour Court by employers simply ignoring things they do not like. That would be further encouraged if they are allowed claim an inability to pay as a means of opting out of agreements on wages. It suited many employers to abide by agreements during the boom because often workers were tied to increases that did not fully reflect the vast profits being made in many sectors of the economy. Now that those days have gone, the vestiges of social partnership are seen by those same employers as a barrier to their driving down wages and undermining conditions. This is especially evident in what are already low wage sectors of the economy, where employers have launched an onslaught on the minimum wage. It was okay for workers in the hotel and catering sectors to live on lower than average wages while businesses boomed and consumers were charged among the highest rates in the world for food, drink and accommodation. Such workers were faced with price rises well in excess of any increase in their income. Any myth that lower paid workers benefited greatly, if at all, from the boom years is baseless. To add insult to injury, attempts are now being made to force such workers into a situation whereby they will have to work for less than the minimum wage. All too sadly, this is the real background to the Bill. The proposals are positive, which I acknowledge, and this has been indicated by the Opposition during the course of contributions on the legislation from the outset. However, right-wing political and economic factions have indicated in their respective commentaries that the proposals will not be worth the paper on which they are written if the Government continues to ride rough-shod over workers and their trade union representatives. It is of great importance that the Government does not allow this legislation to be emasculated during its course through these Houses over the coming weeks. We wish to see the proposed measures included, carried through and upheld. Any amendments considered by the Government would only feed the furious appetite of employers and right- wing economists and amount to turning its back on the hard-won rights of generations of Irish workers and their working conditions. That would be an absolute betrayal. I urge the Govern- ment to hold to the Bill as presented and not to take on board or present amendments that would allow opt out on the part of those who seek only to have the minimum wage absolutely undermined.

Deputy Seán Fleming: I welcome the opportunity of speaking on the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill. I have sat here for the past while listening to the Sinn Féin representative, Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin. I disagree with one or two aspects of his remarks and I will deal with these later in the course of my contribution. I agree with the amendments proposed 22 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) as a result of discussions in the Seanad. Perhaps the Deputy did not intend it — I give him the benefit of the doubt — but essentially what he began here was a veiled attack on the Labour Court. Perhaps it was not his intention, but it is what he did and what he put on the record of the House. He said he was opposed to the amendments allowing employers to claim inability to pay. He said they would create a mechanism for the Government to reduce pay rates. It is the Labour Court that will decide on these matters. By saying the Government will get its way when an employer makes a claim, the Deputy is essentially saying, although perhaps inadver- tently, that the Labour Court is a puppet of the Government. Nothing could be further from the truth. I defend the integrity and impartiality of the Labour Court. The gist of what Deputy Ó Caoláin was saying about amendments on the inability to pay is that, once an employer lodges a claim, he, the Government and right-wing economists will get their way. The Deputy has obviously lost confidence in the Labour Court’s ability to assess the facts, adjudicate on them, seek all the relevant financial information and make an impartial judgment. I have confidence in the ability of the Labour Court to adjudicate on these matters. What Deputy Ó Caoláin is saying is almost like saying that one who makes an application for planning permission is guaranteed to receive it. I look forward to the Labour Court adjudicating fairly on cases. Where it does not accept the statements by employers regarding inability to pay, I hope it will adjudicate impartially and ensure pay rates are not reduced at the request of the employer. I have seen cases of hardship or inability to pay and regarded them as requests to retain the ability to employ somebody rather than requests to let an employee go if rates cannot be met. There will be a hard choice to make. An employer may say he cannot afford to pay at the full, official rate and would like to retain a staff member in employment. The employee may want to be retained in employment. If both are agreeable, the Labour Court may agree, in some cases, to a reduced rate. I consider employers’ claims as claims to be allowed the ability to pay and employ people rather than to let people go. This could happen if an employer either wanted to pay at the full rate or not at all. The legislation addresses this. The main purpose of the Bill is to strengthen the existing system for the making of both employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements and to provide for their continued, effective operation. The Bill also provides for the amendment of the definition of “worker” under the Industrial Relations Act 1990. It is a complicated area and many Members have used words interchangeably and are still a little confused about joint labour committees, employment regulation orders, joint industrial councils, registered employment agreements and what flows from what. Section 3 provides for a new definition of “registered employment agreement” to differentiate between those made before the commencement of the original Act, that is, those registered by the Labour Court, and those made after the commencement of the Act, which will be confirmed by ministerial order. Section 4 provides for the confirmation by order of a registered employment agreement by the Minister. Following receipt of a copy of an agreement, the Minister shall make an order confirming the terms of the agreement. The standard legislative provision will apply. Many Members have spoken at length about the joint labour committees. I am sure the Minister has the figures pertaining to those covered by these committees. There may be 200,000 to 400,000 but I am not quite sure. The number is substantial. Those covered comprise a small, but important, minority of the Irish workforce. I would not like anyone to believe the issues about which we are talking have widespread application in the workplace and affect the majority of the 1.9 million or 2 million in employment. Approximately 20% of the workforce will be affected. Many of those concerned are not well organised and do need protection. 23 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Seán Fleming.]

Section 7 provides for a new definition of “employment regulation order” to differentiate between those made before the commencement of the Industrial Relations Act 1946 and those made after the commencement of the Act. Section 8 provides for the principles and policies to which joint labour committees must have regard when formulating proposals to submit to the Labour Court for employment regulation orders. A joint labour committee must have regard to the legitimate interests of the workers and employers, the prevailing economic circumstances. Only in a fools’ paradise would one believe we do not have to take account of the current economic circumstances. Regard must also be had to the employment circumstances of the workers and the prevailing commercial circumstances of the employers. Last year or some time before that, most Deputies received many representations on joint labour committees. I have a major problem with them and do not know if it is being addressed in this legislation. Neither side at joint labour committees was representative of the people it was supposed to represent. Many employers, especially in the catering area, contacted various Deputies after a visit from the National Employment Rights Authority and stated they were shocked to hear there was such an entity as a joint labour committee. I refer to businesses that might have been set up in the past ten or 15 years. Nobody from the employers’ side who purported to represent the businesses on the committee ever made contact with them. The businesses were not even aware there was such a representative. I question the setting up of structures that we do not audit on occasion to verify that those coming to the table have received a mandate from those whom they are supposed to represent. This has been causing a big problem. I find severe fault with the employers’ representatives on the committees. Irrespective of the branch of IBEC they were from, they were not fulfilling the role they were expected to fulfil at the negotiating table, which role should have involved their consulting their members. They could not have done so because practically no member covered by some of the joint labour committees was even aware of the committees’ existence or of the identity of their local representative. Shame on the employers in that regard. 12I o have’clock a firm view on those on the other side of the negotiating table and am equally critical of them. I am pointing out the deficiencies of the past that I would like to see corrected. Members have already referred to trade union membership. There are approximately 1.9 million people in the Irish workforce, approximately 300,000 of whom are public servants, all of whom are in trade unions. In the private sector, there are approximately 1.6 million employed. The total union membership is in the order of 600,000, which means there are 300,000 union members in the private sector. It is quite clear, therefore, that the trade union movement represents significantly fewer than 20% of the workforce. I am critical of the trade union representatives on the joint labour committees because, by definition, they do not represent over 80% of workers. Many of the people employed in the various industries about which we are talking in respect of the joint industrial council are not unionised in the first instance. On the basis of these statistics, one must consider the legitimacy of the bargaining mandate on both the employer and employee sides. This is one reason there were difficulties over recent years. People who were removed from the coalface were representing the employer side on the ground, including employers in small restaurants, hotels and pubs producing food. Similarly, the spokespeople on the employee side were not representative of those actually working in those establishments. This is probably why some of the agreements got out of hand, contained a few anomalies and were not representative of either side. One of the big anomalies I discovered was that, where an employer wanted to employ an individual, a student, for example, at the weekend, the previous agreement stipulated a pre- 24 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) mium rate should be paid on Sundays. That was accepted across the board. The rate was reduced recently in the catering sector to make it more competitive. This matter does not merely relate to employers and employees. The public is also involved. The service to the public was reduced because employers closed establishments which sell food on Sundays because they were not prepared to pay the excessive rates set down under previous agreements. In circumstances where owners paid these rates and passed on the cost to their customers, the price of Sunday lunch was excessive for some families and they were obliged to stop going to the establishments in question. Business decreased as a result and some people lost their jobs. Excessive rates of pay were agreed in the past I am not referring to the minimum wage in this regard. I may be in a minority on this side of the House but I am of the view that the minimum wage should be sacrosanct. The minimum wage is set at €8.65 per hour. If a person is unemployed, he or she will receive €200 per week for not going to work. I accept that people are entitled to this rate of social welfare, which, based on a 40 hour week, is approximately €5 per hour. A person in receipt of the minimum wage is, therefore, only paid €3.65 extra per hour for doing 40 hours per week. He or she may be obliged to travel to and from work and to bring lunch with him or her. I would not agree with any reduction in the minimum wage at any stage. During the past year I have been critical of many well paid professionals who stated that the level of the minimum wage is one of the problems with which the economy is afflicted. Some of these individuals earn more in one hour than people on the minimum wage earn in a week. Certain of the comments made by these well-paid professionals and many Members of the House in this regard have been reprehensible. I have been obliged to challenge the views of some of these people during conversations relating to this matter. I accept that some of the rates of pay agreed in respect of certain trades in the construction area are excessive. Reaching agreement on these rates was just plain wrong. The rates to which I refer were not merely overly generous, they were illogical in nature. Paying premium rates on Sundays is fine, as long as those to whom they are being paid have done a week’s work. If individuals have worked 30 to 40 hours during the week, they should certainly be entitled to be paid such rates. I understand, however, that if a student employed in his or her local chip shop works on Sunday having only worked six hours during the remain- der of the week, he or she must still be paid the premium rate for the first hour’s work in the week. That is wrong. A person should be obliged to work a minimum number of hours before he or she is entitled to be paid an overtime or premium rate. The concept of paying such a rate in respect of someone’s first hour of work is not great and is preventing some employers from taking on official part-time employees at weekends because they must pay this rate even though said employees may not have worked any hours from Monday to Saturday. This matter must be examined in practical terms. I wish to provide an example as to why some rates of payment were not only uneconomical but also illogical. I refer to the social and affordable housing that has been build under the Part V provision, which was designed to ensure that there would be a social mix in new housing estates. Part V provides that a developer or builder who is building houses and selling them to the local council under the affordable housing scheme is entitled to charge the cost plus a profit margin of up to 15%. The legislation does not stipulate that they must receive 15% but, by and large, this is the benchmark paid to them. A builder in Portlaoise explained to me how the system operates. Under the approved rates relating to the construction industry, a person who is a construction operative class D and who might only be employed to sweep the floors of new houses is entitled to €14.88 per hour. An individual employed to sweep the floor of the 25 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Seán Fleming.] local shop only receives the minimum wage of €8.65. The builder with whom I spoke wanted to know why he should be obliged to pay someone €14.88 per hour to sweep the floor of a new house when that individual’s brother or sister might be paid €8.65 for doing the same job in the local shop. In my opinion, it is illogical to pay €14.88 per hour in such circumstances. That is what has brought some of these arrangements into disrepute. I wish to discuss the logical consequences of what happened in Portlaoise. There will be similar consequences in Monaghan, Castlebar, Ballina and every other provincial town. The production costs incurred by the builder to whom I refer in Portlaoise must, as a result of it being a public contract, be based on the officially agreed construction industry rates. This means that €14.88 is the lowest rate that can be paid to anyone who carries out work on the site. Obviously, higher rates apply in respect of craftspeople. When the builder calculates the cost of building social and affordable houses for Laois County Council and adds a profit margin of 15%, the actual price — including the legitimate profit margin provided for in legislation — is €170,000 per house. The market value of such a house in Portlaoise would only be €130,000. The builder in question is, therefore, obliged to charge the local authority €170,000 for a house that can only be sold for €130,000. The Part V provision obliges the council to pay him the construction cost plus a profit margin with no regard to market value. Though well inten- tioned, the Part V provision was somewhat naive in nature because it was designed on the assumption that prices would always be higher than the cost plus a profit margin. Those who drafted the provision never conceived that prices might drop. Part V is actually perverse in nature, particularly when house prices are dropping and when market values are lower than the officially approved construction rates. The council has objected on every occasion to paying a price above the market value but the builder in question has won out each time because the law in this regard is black and white. This is an example of artificially high approved rates which are not based on local market conditions producing a cost that is higher than the market value. Taxpayers are losing out in this situation and, ultimately, that is to no one’s benefit. The Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, and I discussed a particular matter at a meeting of our parliamentary party earlier this week. In the past I have criticised the excessive nit-picking of the National Employment Rights Agency, NERA, in respect of certain inspections. If a person works in a hotel and if, due to the fact that a wedding was taking place there, he or she does not go home until 12.45 a.m. on Sunday, different rates of pay apply. This may be the law but there comes a point when this must be viewed as nit-picking. However, there is a role for NERA to play. I tabled a motion at our parliamentary party meeting, which the Minister of State commented upon and which was passed, which recommends that compliance officers inspect building sites operated by those who were awarded publicly-funded contracts to con- struct schools, schemes of houses or roads in order to ensure that the approved construction industry rates are being paid to employees. If a builder is awarded a contract on foot of a tender based on a high price and then pays his employees at half rate, he is pocketing taxpayers’ money. This type of behaviour drives down wages. In such circumstances, the taxpayer is paying the full, approved tender price. I want compliance officers to be appointed to inspect projects relating to publicly-funded contracts in order that we might ensure that the full rates of pay are being paid to employees by contractors and sub-contractors. I look forward to the legislation being progressed through both Houses.

Deputy Deirdre Clune: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Indus- trial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009. As Members are aware, the need for this legislation 26 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) arose on foot of a number of High Court challenges in respect of employment regulation orders, EROs, and registered employment agreements, REAs. As Deputy Fleming stated, it is difficult to keep track of the various matters relating to the area of employment to which the Bill refers. Coming to terms with the legislation continues to be an education for me. The Fine Gael Party believes that not to revise the whole labour relations system and structures, including employment regulation orders, EROs, and registered employment agreements, REAs, is a missed opportunity. Many of these go back to the Industrial Relations Act 1946 and have been added to along the way. These need to be stripped down and built up again. I am not saying there should not be protections in place for employees but the structures must be able to support them in areas such as pay, sick leave, overtime payments, time off etc., effectively. Not all workers are represented by unions or in an organisation that recognises unions. In 1984, 30,000 workers were covered by joint labour committees, JLCs. In 1998, it stood at 162,000 and I have no doubt it has grown again in the past decade. A substantial sector needs representation. We have the anomaly that in the hotel sector, unions are on the JLCs. It is important this area is reformed, particularly when we see the challenges in many sectors. Supports and protections must be in place for employees who do not have the support of a union in their workplace. However, there are anomalies in certain sectors such as the hotel and hospitality sector. Due to these, many hotels and catering establishments are not open seven days a week. I accept the current economic climate may also be a factor but there are difficulties for them to match the commitments required of them under EROs. Many Members have been made aware, as Deputy Fleming said, of how different employment rates apply in the hospitality and catering sector if it is open on a Sunday and whether it is city or rural based. I can understand that in some areas there may be a premium but that should be for the employer to decide. It is not a consistent approach and we have missed the opportunity to examine it in this legislation. The same applies to the different rates that apply across various activities in the retail sector such as whether one is working in a butcher’s shop, selling bread or clothes. These different rates are leading to many challenges for employers. Hotel and catering work on Sundays can suit students, who have college commitments Monday to Friday, and young mothers, who find it easier with child care if their partner works Monday to Friday. However, because of the onus on employers to pay what they consider restrictive rates and enforce restrictive EROs many have stopped trading on Sundays. Pubs, for example, that did food on a Sunday are not doing it any more. It is a pity as Sunday is a recreational leisure day for many people. I do not agree the minimum wage base should be changed. Many of the EROs and REAs set higher pay rates for different skill-sets which is important. If people have developed their skills and a trade, then they deserve recognition for that. The minimum wage legislation is a protection for workers, particularly ensuring they are not exploited. Many Members know of employers who think they can get away with not adhering to the legislation, particularly with immigrants. Many immigrants are not aware of the legislation and the obligations employers have in this area. To many of them, €8.65 would seem to be a substantial pay rate and anything less than that might still seem attractive. The National Employment Rights Authority is slowly making its presence felt across the country in ensuring adherence to the legislation. Members will have had representations on REAs from electricians’ bodies on the restrictive fact that before an electrician can work he or she must be a member of the Technical Engineer- ing and Electrical Union. That is a bizarre position which I want to raise directly with the Minister. 27 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Deirdre Clune.]

I agree with the Bill’s principle that the JLCs must recognise the legitimate interests of workers, employers, the prevailing economic and commercial circumstances of an employer and the terms of the national agreement relating to pay and conditions. The Bill allows for an REA or an ERO to be amended or revoked, an important provision as they have been seen to be restrictive to date and did not allow employers or their representatives to take cases to the High Court. Fine Gael believes this is a missed opportunity to reform the system, however. Deputy Var- adkar produced legislation in this area recently, outlining our proposed reforms to EROs, REAs and the JLCs. A JLC comprises four representatives from employers and employee representative organisations and three independent members. It has been noted the latter tend to carry the balance of power in the JLC, resulting in EROs being imposed on employers and employees. The Fine Gael legislation would remove the independent members to have a JLC consisting of equal numbers of employer and employee representatives. We have looked at it to try to achieve a consensus approach rather than the imposition of decisions on any one group. We need to see the detail of the inability to pay clause the Minister has proposed. It must be acknowledged that in some cases there will be an inability to pay, but there are many concerns surrounding that issue. For example, I hope it does not affect the minimum wage and that it would apply to higher pay rates. If one employer claims inability to pay, will that allow others not to pay? Under the structures outlined, the employer’s books will be open and they will be examined. The employer’s ability to pay will be adjudicated on, but what affect will that have on other employers who are in competition in the same business in the area? That needs to be examined because we have many concerns in that regard also. In addition, will people be queuing up to claim inability to pay? There is an inability to pay clause in the National Minimum Wage Act 2000, but that has not been invoked. On the whole, we welcome the Bill but we are concerned to ensure that there would be a floor below which the minimum wage would not go and that issues surrounding competition are considered also. IBEC has looked for it this measure, but SIPTU has concerns about it and believes it will force a race to the bottom and push wages even lower. We must protect againSt that happening. This is a missed opportunity. There are many anomalies and inconsistencies that should be revoked. The Bill is reacting to challenges rather than taking the opportunity to reform the system, which has become outdated and does not represent the current workplace. In this regard, I am referring not to the economic climate, but to how society has changed and advanced, for example, the ability of workers to move from job to job. A mobile workforce and part-time work is very much in demand among young people, and in terms of female participation and students. Some people want to be free to work 12 or 14 hours in one day rather than for seven, eight or nine hours five days a week. It suits people because of their family situations and commitments — they may be carers or whatever. The system does not recognise or allow for such flexibility and the Bill was an opportunity to address all those issues.

Deputy Frank Fahey: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this Bill and I compliment the Minister of State, Deputy Dara Calleary, and his officials on introducing it. It is timely, not least in the context of the downturn in the economy and the need for a modernisation of labour legislation, but for a much more flexible approach than we have seen in the past I want to dwell on the inability to pay provision and I very much welcome the Minister of State’s intention to introduce an amendment in this regard on Committee Stage. At the outset, as a former Minister of State with responsibility for labour affairs, I very much stand by the absolute requirement that workers are adequately paid and properly compensated 28 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) and that workers’ rights are protected. That must continue to be the bedrock of our employment legislation. I have always felt strongly about the need for strong unions and strong representations to ensure workers’ rights are protected and that any type of race to the bottom, such as we have seen in this country in the past, would be prevented. This is not the purpose of this legislation or the inability to pay clause, but we must start to be realistic about our employment situation in the light of the current crisis in employment and in business generally. There are many pressures on employers in a number of sectors who are currently experiencing, as a consequence of the absence of proper procedures, very significant difficulties. I receive complaints from employers who have NERA calling into their places of employment, stating it will bring them before the courts if they do not pay in accordance with registered agreements. There might be some case for that in good times but, at a time when companies in many sectors such as catering, retail and construction are struggling to survive, it is ludicrous for a State agency to do such work. There must be flexibility and, consequently, the inability to pay clause is of major significance. The existing system for the making of both employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements must be improved to provide for their much more effective operation. Given so many recent challenges in the courts, no doubt this Bill will provide for a number of amendments to the existing legislative framework surrounding the GLC and REA systems. I particularly welcome the improved procedures that will be brought about, the clear principles that will be enunciated and the policies which now must be taken into account by the GLCs when they are formulating proposals for the EROs. It is also important to point out, as the Minister of State has done, that the joint labour committee and registered employment agreements are now coming into line with the procedures already established under the National Minimum Wage Act 2000, which allows individual employers to submit inability to pay claims to the Labour Court for adjudication. In my view, the proposal that the joint labour committee and the registered employment agreement system be brought into line with the procedures that allow individual employers to submit inability to pay claims to the Labour Court for adjudication is a good one. These situations have always featured in national pay agreements and it is interesting that they have never been invoked. However, the most important aspect of all of this is that any cut in hourly rates will need the consent of the majority of workers. The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment has pointed out that the clause will not be a diktat for employers and it would have to be negotiated with workers. This is a critically important part of what I would like to see in this legislation, that there must be agreement with the workers involved if there is to be a cut in pay rates. I refer mainly to cuts in pay rates which are far above the minimum wage. I do not for one moment anticipate that in many sectors the minimum wage would be breached, although there are some sectors and companies, particularly in the hospitality business, where minimum wage rates are causing some difficulty at present. I would certainly not like to see a major breach of minimum wages. In individual companies and sectors where it is a question of trying to stay in business, there may be some arguments. Indeed, we hear continuously from employers the argument that the minimum wage should be discontinued, but I do not agree. It is important that we keep it, but it is also important to allow some flexibility where it provides employment which otherwise would be lost or ensures that companies which would otherwise go to the wall can remain in business. I want to dwell more on pay rates which were far above the minimum rate and, in particular, I want to deal with the situation in the construction industry. There is no justification in this climate for some of the rates being paid in the construction industry. I have just checked with 29 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Frank Fahey.] some people in the industry and the registered agreement for the construction industry stipulates a basic rate of €15 per hour and time and a half after 39 hours. In the current climate, where companies are struggling, where companies are on State contracts, which have very much changed recently, and where the State is paying, I see no reason workers who are prepared to work for less than that amount in order to keep their jobs should not be allowed to do so. The basic labour rate in London is £11 per hour. That is a flat rate. There is no time and a half for overtime.

Deputy Martin Ferris: What about the cost of living?

Deputy Frank Fahey: I am quoting a company from the west which had the initiative to go to London to try to ensure continuation of employment for its workers. It is currently tendering in London and the purchase price for a load of gravel delivered to Tottenham in London is £5.65. The purchase price for a load of the same material to be delivered in Dublin is €10 per tonne. Structural concrete is €10 to €15 cheaper in London than in Dublin. When one considers that there are no natural quarries within a 100 miles of the centre of London, it puts that price difference into perspective. If we want to be competitive, get our economy back on track and attract industry, we must be conscious of our cost base and our competitive situation. The registered agreement for the construction industry stipulates that a man operating a stop and go board on a roadworks job earns €850 per week plus €165 subsistence which is more than what a junior doctor or an engineer with four or five years’ experience earns. There is also overtime. In this climate in which we are trying to survive, those kinds of rates for water and sewerage jobs or roadworks jobs being paid for by the State make no sense. The amendment must allow for flexibility. If workers are prepared to work for less than those rates in order to keep their jobs and to keep the company in which they work in business, then that should be allowed. I would not for one moment allow a situation where those workers could be replaced by other people who would be prepared to work for less. I would not allow for any kind of race to the bottom. I have been made aware by workers and employers in the construction industry that they want to become more competitive in order to keep their jobs and win contracts. Where there could be a local agreement in a company and where the workers say they will work for €10 per hour instead of €15 per hour in order to keep their jobs and keep the company competitive, then that should be allowed. It is vitally important we recognise what is happening on the ground, the number of companies going to the wall and, in particular, that the State is paying for all these public service contracts, including water and sewerage schemes, roads schemes, schools building projects and so on which we all want to see continue. The Department of Education and Science estimated that the new engineering block in NUIG would cost €52 million. I understand seven of the eight tenders were below cost and that the winning tender was €29 million. The State got good value for money. It should now seek to put more of these kinds of projects out to tender in order that we get good value for money. If a company and its workers agree that in order to get these jobs, they must take some reduction in wages from €15 to €20 per hour to €10 or more per hour, then that should be accommodated. I very much welcome the Minister’s initiative in regard the inability to pay clause, which is of a temporary nature. I am satisfied with that but I believe that in some sections of the construction industry and in some places in Dublin, where some people seem to have lost the 30 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) run of themselves, flexibility is necessary, as is a recognition that the good times are over and that everybody must take some cut. I reiterate that I do not for one moment accept that there should be any kind of race to the bottom or that workers in a company should be let go and that the company should be allowed to replace them with workers on lower wages. That is not what I am saying. I would not like to see anything like what happened in the Irish Ferries situation where there was an attempt to get rid of workers and bring in contract workers on low pay and on less than the best terms of employment. Employers should not be allowed to deal unfairly with their workers, take advantage of them and impose changes to the rate per hour, nor should that be the kind of diktat available to an employer. That is very different from a situation where worker and employer are prepared to reach agreement, as is happening in many places. Union members from several companies have come to me recently to say they are happy to work for €10 per hour and that they do not want those NERA guys telling their employers they will take them to court if they do not pay €15 per hour, which is a ridiculous situation. I ask the Minister to put a stop to that kind of carry-on by NERA. If it has nothing better to do than that, then we should get it into some other kind of employment. I wholeheartedly support the Bill, in particular the amendment in regard to inability to pay clause. I hope we will see greater flexibility and understanding and that unions and employers will respect this clause as being in the interest of workers, in particular, in order that they may continue in their jobs and that the companies in which they work may continue in business.

Deputy Joe Costello: I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009. The current economic difficulties have resulted in many sectors launching a sustained attack on important areas such as the minimum wage. I was glad to hear speakers on both sides of the House express a decent degree of support for the retention of the minimum wage, which many employers are questioning. It would be very wrong if we were to go down the road of tampering with the minimum wage and the minimum wage legislation. Last year we put NERA on a statutory basis which was part of the Towards 2016 agreement reached by the social partners. Sadly, the social partnership is no longer in place because of Government measures in the recent budget and Government failure to proceed with the negotiations in regard to it. I was appalled by the level of opposition to putting NERA on a statutory basis. The reports of NERA show just how unscrupulous are some employers, who are using and abusing some of the most vulnerable workers in society. NERA is now a statutory watchdog. It is extremely important that we take care of people in the lower levels of employment, that is, people on the minimum wage or slightly above it who may or may not be represented by a trade union, in particular during a period of economic difficulty, because they are the vulnerable people in our society. We now have a situation whereby there are sustained attacks on this framework of legislation, including employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements, which have been instanced in the legal and constitutional challenges brought by employers to try to undermine this element of the industrial relations framework, which is a shame. Not long ago the word was there were more dog wardens than inspectors in the construction industry. That situation has improved. There was a target of 90 inspectors and I understand some 75 are currently in place. It is unfortunate they were not there when the construction industry was rampant and all sorts of abuses were taking place therein. All sorts of dangerous practices have resulted in an inordinate number of injuries and fatalities. That is the other side of the coin. 31 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joe Costello.]

At the current time some 700 top public servants are now retaining a 5.5% bonus while people at the very bottom of the public service, such as clerical officers, are having a 5% reduction in their wages after they earn the first 50 cent. We still have grave inequalities in the way in which we conduct our business. It important that we have a solid, legally-based industrial relations framework which will protect the most vulnerable in our society because many sectors are not properly unionised and many people, particularly in times of difficulty, can be abused and used by unscrupulous employers. For that and other reasons I welcome this Bill, the purpose of which, according to the explanatory memorandum, is to strengthen the existing system for the making of employment regulations orders, EROs, and registered employment agreements, REAs, and to provide for their continued effective operation. The Bill also provides for the amendment of the definition of “worker” under section 23 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990. EROs and REAs have been in operation since 1946 and regulate the terms and conditions of an estimated 300,000 workers at present, a figure we would like to see examined carefully because we know there has been an inordinate increase in recent years but we do not know to what extent. The minimum pay and conditions of employment in low paid sectors where collective bargaining is poorly developed are negotiated and drafted into an ERO by the joint labour committee. These terms and conditions are legally binding and apply equally to union and non- union employment, which is the strength of the EROs, when approved by the Labour Court and are transposed into law by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, a new role which will be given to the Minister. In contrast to EROs, REAs are collective agreements negotiated by the trade union movement and employers in a particular industry or business and registered with the Labour Court. They also apply to all workers and employers in that industry. The system has stood the test of time in protecting Irish workers againSt unscrupulous employers who are only interested in profit and a race to the bottom in terms of wages and ensuring there is a decent wage for a decent level of work. They are also automatically applicable to contractors based outside of Ireland and can be enforced againSt such contractors. Thus, these instruments protect againSt unfair and unscrupulous cross-border competition and a race to the bottom for wages. In recent years employers have engaged in constitutional and legal attacks on the system. In Towards 2016 the trade union movement persuaded the Govern- ment to introduce legislation to protect and secure the system againSt legal challenge. From a worker’s viewpoint the JLCs, EROs and REAs are valuable industrial relations mechanisms. They apply to categories of workers who are generally above minimum wage rates and below unionised rates in fraught and precarious areas of employment. They are good ways of collectively vindicating workers’ rights. As a result of their binding nature on all employers they provide a strong barrier againSt a race to the bottom. This point became particularly obvious in the debate on the first Lisbon treaty referendum and demonstrated that Ireland had a more robust system of worker protection than many other European Union countries due to the legal underpinning of the orders and agreements. However, employers at home and abroad have been seeking to undermine that legal protection. The debates on the first referendum on the Lisbon treaty were very focused on workers’ rights. Some 40% of those who voted againSt it stated one of the main reasons for this was because of their fear that the Lisbon treaty would result in an undermining of workers’ rights. They pointed to the lack of legal protection for workers’ rights in vulnerable areas in other countries. Sweden, Finland, Luxembourg and Germany did not have the same type of protec- tive measures in place. They were unable to apply and connect the system directly to the Irish situation, largely because of EROs and REAs. Nevertheless, because the situation was not 32 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) properly explained it resulted in a significant number of people who would be sympathetic to a good legal statutory structure of industrial relations voting “No” in the first Lisbon treaty referendum. That was something which we argued and the legislation which was being introduced to strengthen it was also an argument put forward in the second Lisbon debate and carried a lot of clout. It is another reason we should make sure the agreements to which I refer have a strong underpinning. . A number of challenges have been taken, most notably a constitutional action by the Irish Hotels Federation in 2007. Thus, the present legislation is a welcome measure to tighten the legal and constitutional basis of the system. Despite that, it is time to examine, regulate and overhaul the JLC system. For example, the last official estimate of the number of workers covered by the system was 162,000 in 1999, more than ten years ago. It had increased enormously since the previous ten years. The increase is largely due to the huge boost in the economy and the massive increase in the service, hotel, tourist, catering and construction industries in recent years, as well as the unprecedented expansion in the economy. I understand the current estimate being compiled estimates those working in the industries to which I refer at between 156,700 and 461,600, or 9% and 25% of total employment in Ireland. It is a huge disparity. We do not have accurate figures on the number of REA, EROs and workers affected by them, and the difference between the different ones which have been negotiated. A significant job of work is required to put a proper database and audit of the system in place. We need information and an audit of the number of practices in order that we can streamline the system. This is an area which the Minister should address as a priority. In the context of this Bill it would be very valuable if we had all of the information, which we do not currently have, to hand. I hope it will be done shortly, because we should consider the extent of the workforce which is affected by this Bill. The Minister received a submission from the Irish Congress of Trade Unions shortly after the Bill was published in 2009 which expressed support and some concerns. The delegates expressed their support, and some of their concerns, to the Minister of State. Of particular concern were remarks made by the Minister of State to the effect that he was considering introducing an inability to pay clause which would allow an exemption from the requirements of the ERO-REA. He said the Government was thinking along those lines. The danger in having such a condition is that application for the exemption would become the norm in the armoury of every employer and the bottom line payments across the board, which characterise the ERO-REA, would be frustrated. With an inability to pay clause, the legal integrity of the ERO-REA system might be frustrated and if this exemption were to be created the system would require a great deal of care. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions listed a number of other concerns which I wish to place on the record in summary fashion. First, ICTU feels that the provision of exemptions will encourage and reward unfair cost competitions, as companies will tender, even for public procurement, on the basis of the exemptions. This will have the effect of increasing all companies’ inability to pay because any company that factors the full rate of the REA-ERO into its tender will be put at a disadvantage. The procurement system would itself immediately distort the entire process. Second, the safeguards are too easily evaded. For example, the provision that the majority of workers must agree to an exemption will not offer robust protection in employments where there is no trade union. It is easy to imagine the type of pressure that might be exerted on workers to agree to their employer being given an exemption. Here again we would bring an unwanted factor into the equation. Third, the safeguard whereby an employer would be granted an exemption only once can be avoided by recasting the company and thus easily disguising repeat applications for exemptions. 33 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joe Costello.] This is a particular worry given the contracting-sub-contracting and phoenix-like features of the construction sector. We know very well how companies can restructure themselves and use the system if the opportunity is present. Fourth, the proposed method of establishing inability to pay, namely, that the Labour Court must be satisfied the employer is unable to pay and is likely to lay off workers or terminate their employment, is much easier to establish by contractors in poorer EU member states. This could give rise to unfair and inappropriate cross-border competition. In other words, the very strength of the ERO-REAs in the 27 member states and some other countries would be undermined because poorer countries could plead inability to pay much more easily than, for example, strong companies in this country. Fifth, there is no limit to the amount below the ERO-REA that the Labour Court will exempt an employer from paying or providing. There are particular concerns about how exemptions will interact with pension obligations and other entitlements set down in the agreements. Again, we must ask what is the bottom line. Sixth, the proposed duration of the exemption is too long — at between 3 months and a year — as construction contracts regularly last for periods less than a year. This again is an avenue for undermining the EROs and REAs. I offer as an example, the recent high profile case of the popular Italian restaurant, Carluc- cio’s, on Dawson Street, which demonstrates how external factors can impact on employment and wages. The retail sector in this prime Grafton Street area has plummeted in business activity but commercial rents have remained similar to what they were in the heady days of the Celtic tiger. Most of the retailers in this area not far from Leinster House are up in arms about the incredible rents they are still expected to pay. Although it continued to do good business Carluccio’s could not reduce its prices, pay staff and pay the rent and so it was forced to close its doors. A viable business, even in these hard times, was shut down. Happily, a compromise was reached with the landlord on the rent issue, the restaurant was reprieved and is again open. However, very many other retail outlets in the general area have closed because of excessive rents. The landlords in this High Street area are mainly large companies and pension funds and are based abroad. They do not know the situation on the ground in this country and they do not care. They want to get the return on their pension funds or for their shareholders. That is a feature of the High Street rents just down the road. An inability to pay exemption would allow the ERO-REA to be breached and permit a race to the bottom but would do nothing about the real cause of the problem — the exorbitant rents being charged in these difficult times. This is not a single issue but is much broader in terms of how we must deal with keeping down prices in this economic climate. The amendment to the definition of worker is extended to include workers in the Vocational Educational Committees, VEC, who are other than teachers, to enable them access the dispute settling agencies, namely, the Labour Relations Commission, the Labour Court and the Rights Commissioner Service. That is reasonable because at present they have access only to a scheme of conciliation and arbitration and they should have the expanded access. However, any future change, according to this legislation, will be made possible only through fresh primary legislation rather than by statutory instrument. Even though I am not a proponent of the statutory instrument, nevertheless this requirement will result in a lengthy parliamentary process and the workers concerned will undoubtedly experience a considerable and unnecessary delay before the new definition is in place. There is a balance to be arrived at between protecting the worker and allowing a procedure that may go on for months or years. This seems to be an area where a ministerial order would be appropriate, as with a statutory instrument, unless there were a particular aspect to a case that would require primary legislation.. 34 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

There is need to address the totally unsatisfactory situation whereby workers who retire are denied recourse to the employment rights mechanisms unless they refer their claim prior to retirement. This is an anomaly in the legislation. An amendment should be tabled and we should address the situation. Retired workers are exactly that and deserve their rights as workers. The legislation should be amended to provide a facility for those workers to have their grievances heard and examined. The industrial relations architecture which contains employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements has served workers, the country and employers well for more than half a century. I welcome the legislation’s main thrust which is to strengthen this legal framework. However, it would be short-sighted if the minimum wage were to be threatened in the present economic recession and if agreed minimum rates negotiated between employer and trade unions for the most vulnerable workers in our society were to be undermined.

Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I welcome the opportunity to make a brief contribution to a very important debate. The purpose of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009 is to strengthen the existing system for the making of employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements. The Bill also provides for the amendment of the definition of “worker”, as made in section 23 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990. As we know, this Bill was necessitated by recent High Court challenges. I was interested in Deputy Costello’s point about a particular restaurant near Grafton Street, although I am not familiar with it. The Deputy might be interested to hear that I went to a football match at a very famous ground in England some time ago. The very prominent chairman of that club told me that a long time ago he had bought properties in Grafton Street. I am not getting at this chairman of a Premiership club and I will not name him. He told me that the property he had bought in Grafton Street was a good investment. What Deputy Costello said in regard to those landlords is very accurate. I am not getting at anybody and I do not know if the particular individual has retained his property but I am sure he has because it was a good investment for him at the time. I welcome the presence of the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, who was my former neighbour in the dungeons of LH2000. It is good to see him progressing so well and I compliment him on the job he is doing. I do not patronise him when I say this. In any dealings I have had with the Minister of State and his office, he has been very helpful. 1oThis’clock Bill sums up my position regarding employment issues. Deputy Martin Ferris was wondering how I would slip Tallaght into this speech. While there are many people working in Tallaght, there are many people in Tallaght who are unemployed. I am not afraid to express my concern for those people in my constituency and in the Dublin region generally who are unemployed. The unemployment figures for those registering at the social welfare office have increased hugely in the past year or so, like everywhere else in the country, and there are now almost 10,000 people unemployed in Tallaght. This is relevant in the context of this Bill. When I first worked, I worked in Carton Brothers wholesalers, a well-known old Irish company then situated in Halston Street. I was lucky to get a job there and while there took an interest in industrial relations and trade unions. A great man in Carton’s at the time, Joe Forde, encouraged me to become involved in this area and nominated me for the Dublin District Council at the time. It may come as a shock to some Members that I have that trade union background and that I took evening courses in industrial relations. At a time I was not sure of what I wanted to do with my life, this was something I genuinely wanted to do. I had no notions about politics at the time, but wanted to do something meaningful. That is not to say politics are not meaningful this week. I was wondering earlier how I would slip George Lee into this 35 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Charlie O’Connor.] contribution, but I will take the advice of Deputy Enda Kenny and move on. I do not want to get into any more trouble with my colleagues in Fine Gael. I recall that in those days we responded in a trade union way with regard to little issues that arose in the workplace. I often think back to those times and wonder what I was doing. Things have changed over the years. The role of the trade unions has been modified and they have had to do things differently. This legislation points that up. The year 1946 was a long time ago, but it was a good year for me. Other people have probably told the Minister, both in this debate and elsewhere, that there is much to be done in this area. At the same time, industrial relations policy is changing by the day. It has certainly changed over the past year and some of the attitudes that prevailed over a year ago are now outdated. However, as the recession recedes and the good times return in some form, industrial relations policy must take stock again. At this point in our history, it is good we are taking a look at industrial relations and the various issues involved. I am not going to say that I am comfortable about the section in the Bill dealing with inability to pay. At the same time, I understand the reason the challenge is there. There are two sides to the issue. We must continue to create a situation where there is confidence in business and where jobs are created. The issue is about creating jobs. Bill Clinton may have said, “It’s the economy, stupid”, but it is now all about jobs. This is true for all of our constituencies. The situation is no different in Tallaght in Dublin South-West than it is Mayo, Wexford, Cork or Kerry. We must all fight our corner and come in here and make the case for jobs for our constituencies. I am not going to fight with anybody else, although I know some of my country cousins often say that everything goes to Dublin. It does not. However, Dublin is the capital of the country and I am not afraid to stand up and fight for it. Lest that statement start a rumour, I am not nor will I be a candidate for Mayor of Dublin. I am quite happy being a Fianna Fáil Deputy for Dublin South-West.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Deputies should never rule themselves out of any position.

Deputy Deirdre Clune: Never say never.

Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I want to be clear about this in case somebody takes that meaning. I am happy doing what I am doing and am positive about the need for jobs in the Dublin region, particularly in Dublin South-West and Tallaght. Deputy Costello and others referred to the issue of pressure on families and people with jobs who face the taunt that at least they have a job. It is important we listen to these people. Some of them are faced with the threat of the company they have served and to which they have been loyal considering the inability to pay clause. At the same time, there are issues that may give rise to the need for that. Some Deputies and business representatives have made the point that companies must get some assistance to keep going and maintain employment. One of my colleagues made the point last week that many small companies around the country support four or five jobs, but other companies have much larger workforces. Everything must be done to facilitate the retention of employment in small companies. However, my jury is still out on the issue of the inability to pay clause. It is very much a matter of balance. Where a company genuinely feels it has an inability to pay, we must understand the effect that may have on the workers. Many of those who have visited me at my clinics or elsewhere have made the point that while they had a good job a year ago, their company is now under pressure and they are being told they must take a pay cut or that they must cut their hours. Times are difficult. 36 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

I said yesterday when speaking in another debate that people sometimes think this only happens in our jurisdiction. However, if one watches Sky News or CNN, one sees the same thing is happening everywhere else. In the news today all the talk is about economies I would have thought were good economies, the economies of Greece, Portugal and Spain. These countries all face similar challenges and difficulties and we should be aware of that. The issue is about retaining jobs and creating employment. It is also about protecting workers from employers who might take advantage of the current climate and treat their workers in a way they should not. On the legislation, I understand there has been a commitment, under the social partnership agreement, Towards 2016, to a follow up review and transitional agreement. The main amendments proposed relate to the Industrial Relations Acts 1946 to 2004. I understand the amendments include introducing a set of principles and policies to which regard should be had in making proposals for an employment regulation order, ERO. The Bill also introduces a set of procedures to be followed when formulating proposals for an employment regulation order and ensures Oireachtas scrutiny of such orders and registered employment agreements, REAs. In talking about the work of the Oireachtas I will not be drawn into the debate in the media this week. However, I listened to “The Late Debate” on Tuesday night in which two of my colleagues, Deputies Niall Collins and Joe Costello took part. Both of them skilfully and effectively supported and defended the political system againSt those who were saying that Monday’s episode was all about the need to reform the Dáil. It is important that those who are responsible for getting a positive message out about the Houses of Oireachtas understand the challenges. We are easy targets in that regard. We are reminded by the line taken that the Oireachtas has a lot to do. I favour a process where Oireachtas committees take an active role in issues like this and issues such as nominating people to sit on State boards and committees. I have no difficulty in that regard. I take a lot of interest in American politics, although I have never been to America. However, I have studied the American system and believe its Senate hearing system is very effective. If that kind of system could be introduced here — there is slow movement towards that in the Oireachtas — it would send out a positive message and negate some of the negative views that have been circulating since Monday. People are entitled to martyr any Member and say it means we need reform, but I have a different view. At the same time, I believe we should not be afraid to reform and to create the situation where the Oireachtas——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Could we meander back towards the legislation?

Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I take the Leas-Cheann Comhairle’s correction. However, I have listened to many of the other speeches and I am not beyond the parameters used by others. Nonetheless, I am happy to take the direction of the Chair.

Deputy Dara Calleary: It could be the definition of worker party legislation.

Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I will not rise to that. The Bill secures the validity of both the REAs and EROs that were made and registered under the legislation prior to the current proposed amendments. It also introduces a power to amend an ERO within six months in the case of error and set a fixed term of office for the chairman of the joint labour committee. While I will not challenge the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, my remarks on Oireachtas reform fall very much into that section, which it is important to note. It is also interesting to note that the Bill includes provision of an amendment to section 23 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990 to allow officers of VECs, other than teachers, access to the dispute-settling agencies. I understand the legislation proposed by the Minister proposes to 37 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Charlie O’Connor.] remove the power to make changes in the definition of workers by ministerial order and to ensure that future changes in the definition will be made only by means of primary legislation. I am told a ministerial order dated 1998, giving local authority staff access to dispute-settling agencies, will also be confirmed by a proposed amendment of the statute. I understand that in addition to proceeding with the proposals to strengthen the existing JLC and the operation of REAs as outlined in the Bill, the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, has also signalled his intention to bring forward amendments on Committee Stage to address a number of issues, including inability to pay, on which I made my point, interpretation by the Labour Court of EROs and REAs, access by retired workers to IR bodies and other issues. To stray again into the area of Dáil reform, I have always taken the view that with regard to proposed legislation, it is good that we all have an opportunity to contribute, across the board, because we all have our views. It is a good system that we have a plenary session in which we have an opportunity to speak on legislation and get our thoughts on the record. Following that, the process moves to the relevant committees. I would like to go to all the meetings of some of the committees. I once told a former Taoiseach that I enjoy committee work but I wonder sometimes whether the committee cares whether I attend or not. It is the problem of the Dáil that people do not see the committees at work. If anybody is looking at this debate, and I am sure not many are, they will see there are only four or five Members present and they will think everybody else is gone home, which of course is not the case. The committee system of going through legislation, line by line, listening to what people have to say and dealing with Government and Opposition amendments, produces good work. The process then comes back to the Dáil, which makes the final decisions. I am a big supporter of the committee system. In a week in which there has been a lot of media coverage about what we do in the Dáil, how we do it and what systems we use, it is fair to make the point that good work is being done in regard to legislation, certainly in regard to this Bill. Much dotting of the i’s and crossing of the t’s will come forward from this process. I wish the Minister of State well in this regard. I had hoped to stray into a couple of local issues that I wanted to put on record but, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has already chastised me, I will be careful. I have been getting a lot of mail——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Chair has shown the Deputy great latitude.

Deputy Charlie O’Connor: The Leas-Cheann Comhairle might know Tallaght. He will know that in the area close to where he visited this morning, there is a major issue concerning St Joseph’s special school in Balrothery. I put on record my support for that school, as well as my support for the west Tallaght resource centre. While I apologise for being parochial, having listened to some of the speeches, I know other colleagues have done the same. I want to record my views in regard to the High Court challenge to which I referred earlier. As we know, it came from proposals made by the hotels to the Labour Court on the revised minimum rates of pay for workers, affecting an estimated 25,000 staff. This was an issue that crossed my desk in a big way and people in my constituency and in the Dublin region generally made contact with me on it. At the end of 2007, workers’ representatives voted in favour of the proposals while the employers’ representatives opposed the proposals, leaving the casting vote to the chairman, who felt he was obliged to implement the proposals in 2008. On the same day, the Labour 38 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

Court made an order to give effect to the proposals, with the resulting ERO due to come into effect on 16 November 2007. I understand that on hearing the ERO had been made, the Irish Hotels Federation immediately sought and was granted an interim injunction stopping the order from coming into force. The organisation, along with other members’ organisations and a particular individual, were also granted leave to bring judicial review proceedings againSt the HJLC, the Labour Court, Ireland and the Attorney General. It is fair to make the point in regard to balance in the implementation of the ability to pay clause. Two or three years ago, one could make points from these benches in regard to that issue, express one’s attitude and everybody would be quite happy. Today, one must be very careful. I will not stand here and talk about, to quote a word often used by the leader of the Opposition, screwing employers at a time when we want them in all our communities to create jobs, to invest and to look after their employees. At the same time, we have to be open to the upset and concern that is often expressed by workers, not only in hotels but in many other jobs in many other industries, that it is difficult for them. While they are happy to be in a job, they do not like to be taunted with the suggestion that just because they are in a job, they should stay quiet. I appreciate the latitude the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has allowed me. I wish the Minister of State well. This is important legislation and I look forward to supporting it.

Deputy Martin Ferris: The Bill is a further development of legislation that was introduced by Fianna Fáil in the 1940s at a time when there were similar pressures from employers to undermine wages and conditions. It is significant that such legislation, which reflected Fianna Fáil’s then close relationship with the trade union movement and its support among workers, reversed what had been a period of sustained decline in wages from the 1920s onwards, when employers of that time had a close, cosy relationship with Cumann na nGaedhael. At that time also, the economic debate was dominated by people sympathetic to employers who bemoaned the allegedly high rates of pay that were preventing the development of business here. However, despite the fact the tax on profits was cut in the 1920s, that there was little or no public expenditure to improve social provision and that wages and even pensions had been cut through official measures, and despite all that was done to penalise workers, the economy stagnated up to the 1930s . Then, as now, those who had money in the country were happy for the most part to engage in speculative investment or to invest their money abroad. It was only when the first Fianna Fáil Governments after 1932 introduced progressive legislation to encourage both industrial development and to improve workers’ living standards and wages that any kind of development took place. Fianna Fáil might perhaps reflect on its history and on the contents of this Bill in the context of how it corresponds with its historical past before rushing to introduce the proposed amendments to reduce the minimum wage. A similar process of economic growth and improved wages and trade union involvement in what has become known as “social partnership” was also evident in the 1960s and during our most recent period of growth. The clear lesson is that economic growth does not come from driving down wages and undermining hard work and improved conditions of employment. The contrary is the case. Yet, this is what is being claimed by many employers, economists, economic commentators and political representatives who take their cue from the employers’ organisations. It is important mechanisms to allow workers some type of defence againSt efforts to undermine wages and conditions remain in place. How effective this and the measures contained in this Bill will be is by no means certain given the willingness of some employers to ignore existing procedures agreed between employers and trade unions and enshrined in legislation. 39 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Martin Ferris.]

The context of this Bill has changed since it was first indicated that the Minister intended to amend it to allow employers to pay less than the minimum wage and the minimum agreed rates in other sectors under employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements on the basis that companies can claim an inability to pay. An estimated 300,000 workers will potentially have their wages cut if this happens. There are already people who are surviving on well below the average industrial wage, many of whom could be described as the working poor. These are people who despite working hard find it difficult to meet their mortgage commitments, rents and bill payments. What has been forgotten in all of this debate is that people earning the minimum wage, low income families and those in receipt of social welfare payments are part of a sector of our communities and society who spend every penny they earn in their local economies unlike those in other sectors, including the rich, powerful and elite, who by and large invest their moneys abroad. The Government, supported by some of the Opposition, is prepared to go down the road of undermining and reducing the minimum wage. The State already recognises the plight of people in this sector by way of the family income supplement scheme, which has been accurately described as a mechanism through which the State subsidises low wage employers. The Government is aware that it is virtually impossible for any person with children to live other than hand to mouth on €346 per week given the high cost of necessities and accommodation, many of which have been rented or purchased from the brothers, sisters, sons and daughters of the same people who believe that earning €8.65 per hour for serving meals or drinks that cost more than that represents a fair return. Now that the Government, at the behest of ISME and IBEC and their friends, has put manners on the big bad public servants, including the ushers, bar staff, secretarial assistants and restaurant workers in the Oireachtas, who unbeknown to them were responsible for the recession, it is going after the minimum wage. These are people employed here and elsewhere in the public service who if their weekly wage was calculated on an hourly basis have already slipped below that threshold. We recently witnessed an attack on the public sector unions and workers, 49% of whom earn below the average industrial wage. Unashamedly, this Government attacked their incomes resulting again in money being taken out of the local economies where these people live. This is happening right across this island, in particular in towns like Tralee in which the biggest employer is the public sector. Cutting public sector pay has taken millions out of the local economy. People in the public sector are at least unionised and have the means to resist the attacks upon them. I welcome that unions are becoming more unified. Many in the low wage sectors, including security, hairdressing, hotels, pubs and so on are not unionised and are therefore more vulnerable to having their wages and conditions undermined. In many cases people in these categories are not unionised, are isolated as individuals and will be preyed upon and abused by unscrupulous people who will take advantage of the reduction of the minimum wage for their own selfish gain. If this legislation, designed originally to protect workers in such situations, is amended in the manner proposed people will have no legal protections againSt their wages being driven below the minimum rates and legal protections will count for nothing. For this reason, it is vital that any attempt to amend this Bill to cut the minimum wage rates for the lowest paid workers in this State is opposed and defeated. When preparing my contribution for today I came across a Press statement from last year in regard to a report on minimum wage levels throughout Europe drawn up by the EUROSTAT wherein this House is referred to several times. It states that the minimum wage in Ireland is the second highest in Europe at €1,462 per month as compared with Luxembourg at €1,600, a fact loudly propagated by Government at the time. Many Cabinet Ministers highlighted the fact that Ireland was second highest in this regard. However, according to the new EUROSTAT 40 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) report, when adjustments are made for purchasing power in different countries Ireland falls to sixth position on the league table, which is a big drop. I want to share with the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and Members present a letter I received from a constituent, a married women whose husband, a C2 sub-contractor, has been unemployed for the past 12 months and who experienced great difficulty obtaining his social welfare entitlements. Every obstacle was put in his way. There is not a Member of this House who does not know someone or has not received representations from, I assume, a large number of people in respect of previously self employed people who are unable to obtain their social welfare entitlements. As I stated, the woman concerned is married and has two children, one of whom is attending secondary school. Her husband has been out of work for some considerable time. She works 40 hours a week and earns €9 per hour and as such does not qualify for any State assistance. Her take home pay is €360 per week. Following the recent budget she now pays an income levy of 2%. She has a moderate but not insignificant mortgage which when paid leaves her with €210 per week. It costs her €110 per week to meet payments on her car loan, ESB, phone and heating bills, leaving her with €100 per week to pay for groceries, school books, fees and any medical bills that may arise. This woman does not qualify for a medical card or family income supplement. She is living in the real world. This story can be replicated in respect of hundreds of thousands of people right across the country. I listened earlier to the contribution of a Member of this House in which he referred to the construction sector and stated that the income earned in that sector was not of the real world. He referred to the fact that employment would be created by reducing union wage rates in the construction sector. How in the name of God could any Member of this House make such an ignorant statement? The biggest hit in the current high unemployment rate comes from the construction sector. I live in the small village of Ardfert, five miles from Tralee. We had a very good Gaelic football team that won two All Irelands, at junior and intermediate level, three and four years ago respectively. We were able to win those trophies because most of the team was employed in the construction sector. They were young men who were encouraged to have trades because of the boom — the so-called balloon that was never going to burst The club was very successful and every single penny those people earned was spent in the local economy. The boom turned to bust, however, because it was based on an unsustainable construction sector that was never going to last All those young men, who are now in their mid-twenties, are out of work and have nowhere to go. Nonetheless, a Government Deputy said that high union rates were responsible for unemployment. I could not believe it. There is no work in the construction sector in County Kerry; it is gone. That Deputy’s comment was an attempt to fool people that if they took a wage cut there would be work for them. In fact, the construction sector is down and will not be back for a long time. The statistics from Government Ministers indicate there are 40,000 empty units, yet a Deputy could make such a statement here about employment. We have seen a continual attack on public sector workers, which is so reminiscent of the 1913 lock out. History has an awful habit of repeating itself. In 1913, workers in Dublin were locked out, and in the 1920s and 1930s workers were also penalised. In the 1950s there was mass emigration when people had to leave the country. The big business fat-cats stayed and prospered while the working class were forced to leave. On each occasion we had a controlling press in this State — it was William Martin Murphy in 1913 and it is Sir Anthony O’Reilly in 2010 — that set an agenda attacking both public and private sector workers. The attack on the public sector workers has been made and now the Government intends to attack the weakest people in the private sector, most of whom are not unionised and are on the minimum wage. We are led to believe that the recession or depression is not the fault of the economic system, big business, developers, multinationals or the banks, which are being bailed out by workers’ 41 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Martin Ferris.] taxes. We are also told that it has nothing to do with the fact that the political system has been compromised by big business and those who control the economic system. According to the Government side of the House, it is the workers’ fault. Let the message go out loud and clear, however, that workers are totally exonerated from the terrible blunders, contrived or otherwise, by the political system in this State, which gave rise to the terrible depression we are living under. The working class have been continually exploited by a class of people who believe it is their divine right to do so for their own selfish and greedy benefit. The political system propagates, supports and institutionalises the income inequality that exists to this day. It is time for public and private sector unions to come together and stand againSt what is happening. They should stand united againSt the wrongs that are being perpetrated againSt the most vulnerable people in society. They should stand for the entitlements, human rights and justice for working class people across this island. It is time to stand up to the political establishment and a political system in which inequality is ingrained. It is a system that divides workers and utilises mechanisms, including the press, for its own benefit. It is time to stand up to the Galway tent and the multinationals that rape our resources and take them from this island. Those resources are given away by Members of this House who have been entrusted to responsible positions by the people of this State. Until such time as workers unite and the trade union movement comes together, it will be an easy task for the political establishment to divide and conquer. I appeal for the trade union movement across this island to stand againSt what is being done to the most vulnerable people in our community. They should stand up to those who seek to divide and continue to exploit workers for their own greed and selfish benefit. The section of the Bill, which is primarily designed to reduced the minimum wage, is a reflection of what the political establishment in this State stands for.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call on Deputy Chris Andrews. He has up to 20 minutes if he so wishes.

Deputy Chris Andrews: I thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for the opportunity to speak on this measure. The purpose of the Industrial Relations Bill, which was published last summer, is to strengthen the existing system for making employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements, as well as providing for their continued effective operation. Some of the main amendments in the Bill include the introduction of a set of principles and policies to which regard should be had in making proposals for an employment regulation order or ERO; the introduction of a set of procedures to be followed when formulating proposals for an ERO; ensuring Oireachtas scrutiny of EROs and Registered Employment Agreements or REAs; and setting a fixed term of office for the chairman of a JLC. The Bill also includes provision for an amendment to section 23 of the Industrial Relations Act 1990 to allow officers of VECs, other than teachers, to have access to dispute-settling agencies. Last week, at a meeting of the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, a worrying picture was painted by the Restaurants Association of Ireland of that industry’s future. The association’s representatives made a stark presentation which was heavily critical of the JLC structure. Those engaged in the catering industry are invariably small operations, yet collectively they employ a large number of people. They can be compact operations which generally have good relations with their staff, with whom they interact closely. 42 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

If there are too many restaurants in the sector it can, by its nature, pose difficulties. Nonethe- less, many restaurateurs have tried to franchise their businesses, although it is a personalised operation. Their dealings with staff and customers are very personalised. Owners invest much time and money in establishing restaurants and it is natural for them to have a vision and aspiration as to how they will develop. They want to make a difference in terms of employment and all the benefits that bestows on society. However, in some cases the staff in restaurants are earning more money than the people who invested the money and time and who, when the business is quiet, cannot relax because they are worrying about whether they have done something wrong or upset a group of customers and, when it is busy, just do not have time to do all the work that is required. They take all those worries home with them. In most instances not many of the staff do that, and when it gets to the stage where the staff are taking home more money than the business owners, we have a problem. Last week, the Restaurant Association of Ireland painted a very bleak picture of the future unless we make changes. This Bill, with the introduction of an inability to pay provision, should go some way towards alleviating the pressures that employers in this and other sectors currently experience under both systems, as a consequence of the absence of a mechanism for processing claims for inability to pay. I welcome that measure. Clearly businesses are under severe pressure from every quarter. Rates, rents and staff costs all contribute to putting businesses out of business. The consequences are not just limited to the business and its employees, but also affect their spouses and children. We should not just dismiss it as an attack on the workers. Restaurateurs have no interest in attacking workers. They want to make a living and get a few bob out of the business. They enjoy the cut and thrust of business. They also want to ensure that their staff are treated well. They work with and know their staff. It is certainly not “them versus us” in the restaurant business. I have worked in the catering industry for many years and I know there is not great glory involved — except perhaps for one of these new celebrity chefs. For the vast majority of people working in the restaurant business, while it is very rewarding, it is also very difficult work. The Bill goes some way towards addressing that matter. While on the subject of labour affairs, there is an issue in my constituency outside the restaurant business which, while not affected by any of the measures to be introduced in this Bill, requires urgent attention from the Minister of State with responsibility for labour affairs. Last summer, the official industrial dispute at Marine Terminals Limited in Dublin Port received much media attention and there were some protest marches. The dispute started on 3 July 2009 and was suspended by the striking workers more than three months ago. One would have expected some resolution could have been found during that period. The company accepted a Labour Court recommendation on 20 October 2009. The outstanding issues were referred to a Labour Court appointed arbitrator who issued a final decision on Wednesday, 6 January. People may not realise that the company is question, Marine Terminals Limited, whose parent company is the Peel Ports Group, has now stated that it is not bound by the arbitrator’s decision and will not comply with this decision. This action displays an appalling disregard for the State’s labour dispute mechanisms and means that the staff affected by this dispute have been left in limbo, with apparently no other options available to them. Furthermore, it would appear that there are no repercussions for this company which is behaving so disgracefully. The people who criticise unions and are ideologically opposed to them do not seem to realise that the unions only exist because of the actions of such companies which have an absolute disregard for employees. Such cases have an impact on staff relations in small and medium- sized enterprises with a knock-on effect in the restaurant business. Every business is perceived in terms of them and us, which is not always the case. In this case, Marine Terminals Limited’s 43 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Chris Andrews.] blatant disregard for the industrial relations process in many ways hardens people’s views. It certainly hardens the views of those working there and their families. The Labour Court is a court of last resort in the industrial relations process. It is expected that the parties come to the process in good faith and consequently are prepared to give serious consideration to the court’s recommendations. In an ideal world, companies entering these negotiations would behave in an honourable manner and concede to the courts and arbitrators recommendations. However, we all know that in the real world, money is what drives commercial companies rather than doing the honourable and decent thing. That certainly appears to be the attitude of some very large international companies. The Government must place some form of sanction on companies who choose to abdicate their responsibilities. Why do we have all of these systems in place if there is nothing to ensure that they will be abided by? It makes me angry when I reflect on this particular case. At this stage, the Government must take some action to ensure that companies, which accept Labour Court recommendations and then renege on them, must face some consequence; otherwise, it undermines the entire industrial relations system. The employees of Marine Terminals Limited are decent and honourable people in my constituency who placed their faith in the Labour Court system. At this stage they appear to have been failed by the system. While I have drifted somewhat off the point, it is a serious matter that needs consideration. The Bill is a step in the right direction and addresses some of the issues and concerns of businesses. Ultimately, we must support businesses which represent the lifeblood of society. People talk about the differences between society and the economy. The economy supports society. It ensures that we have and can pay for a good healthy society. The Bill is good and I commend it the House.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): I thank the Deputies who spoke today and on the previous occasions for their contributions. I thank my departmental officials for attending and listening. We have noted many ideas and themes from the debate. There is general agreement about the main objectives of the proposed legislation. A common theme of the majority of contributions has been the importance of maintaining protection for the most vulnerable workers and ensuring that the existing mechanisms for making employment regulation orders and registered employment agreements operate effectively and are seen as being fit for purpose. While this particular measure constitutes only one part of a suite of measures intended to strengthen the protection of the rights of employees and to secure greatly increased public confidence in the system of compliance, Deputies emphasised a need to reform the State’s architecture providing avenues for redress of workers’ grievances and have argued that the current system is excessively complicated for employees and employers alike. There has been a general welcome for the proposal to establish Oireachtas scrutiny of EROs and REAs and to secure these mechanisms againSt the risk of legal challenge. The introduction of a clear set of principles and policies for JLCs to consider in framing their proposals and the more focused supervisory role of the Labour Court in relation to the work of JLCs was also generally supported. The proposed extension of the definition of “worker” and the proposal to use to primary legislation in future as the mechanism for effecting changes in this area was generally welcomed. A number of Deputies referred to the severe competitive pressures operating in many sectors, and the importance of sustaining employment levels by maintaining reasonable wage rates that reflect the reality of the current economic and trading environment. Some Deputies have 44 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) referred to recent examples of constructive engagement by all parties within JLCs that have resulted in adjustments to both rates and conditions of employment under the relevant EROs covering key sectors. It was acknowledged that the provisions of this Bill would facilitate such consensus-building in future. I pay tribute to my predecessor, the Minister of State, Deputy Billy Kelleher, for his work in this regard. The need for safeguards to protect the workers that may be affected where employers may claim inability to pay was urged by Deputies across the board. They were concerned that those securing exemptions might obtain an unfair competitive advantage relative to other compliant firms and cause a collapse in wage protection standards. I will refer to this later. The broad endorsement Deputies have given to the main purpose of this Bill echoes the welcome it received in the Seanad, as does the social partner consensus in favour of changes to modernise and streamline the JLC system. Together, the social partners had resolved to rectify legal and constitutional deficiencies affecting the JLC and REA systems and to update the provisions of the Industrial Relations Acts so as to ensure the responsiveness of our industrial relations machinery to changes in the labour market and to the immediate challenges facing the economy. I want to reassure Deputy Penrose in particular that, as was noted this morning by Deputy Costello, there was continuing consultation with employer and trade union interests both before the publication of the Bill in August 2009 and in the period following. I invited ICTU and IBEC to participate in consultations in August 2009. At that stage I informed them of my intention to introduce an amendment providing for an inability to pay mechanism. Both organisations, as was noted by Deputy Costello, made submissions to me in recent months and those submissions are the subject of continuing consultations between my officials and representatives of the main employer and trade union interests. I have also made a commitment to spokespersons that we will consult with them about the amendment when we are in a position to table it. Many Deputies wanted to see the streamlining of the whole architecture — Deputy Clune referred to that this morning — for the redress of employment rights grievances and disputes. While the Bill deals primarily with the streamlining of procedures for making EROs and REAs and makes limited changes regarding access for workers to the industrial relations machinery, I agree that a piecemeal evolution of employment rights legislation over the past 30 years has resulted in a complicated system which is confusing and costly, with a duplication of functions as well as divergences in procedures and remedies. I have found, however, that there is a general acceptance by stakeholders and service users alike of the desirability of simplifying and streamlining the complaint, appeal and enforcement procedures across existing bodies and I agree with every speaker who has said the status quo is unsatisfactory. I have begun an examination of the scope for effecting a more coherent and streamlined organisation of the roles and functions currently discharged within the fragmented architecture in the industrial relations and employment rights field. I have already met with both ICTU and IBEC in recent months as part of this review of employment rights, industrial relations structures and processes and we have had a useful exchange with their representatives. Both organisations had very positive things to say about the operation of the employment bodies. There are real strengths that need to be protected and built upon. They also had some views about how procedures could be improved. However, nobody was calling for a full “scrap and re- build” approach. We are in the process of collating views and reflecting on them. I have indicated that my preference would be for a pragmatic twin-track approach involving exploring the feasibility of a one-stop-shop concept that would ensure more coherence regarding the appropriate forum 45 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Dara Calleary.] for adjudication on relevant issues so as to avoid wasteful “forum shopping”, of which there is evidence at the moment; and the tidying up of the existing corpus of employment law with a view to ironing out wrinkles, inconsistencies, routing ambiguities, etc. I look forward to the support of Deputies opposite through the Oireachtas committees for some sensible reform measures and for a carefully prepared programme of consolidation in the employment law field. Regarding the joint labour committees, Deputy Varadkar queried the regionally differen- tiated rates that were set by JLCs within the same sector. He called for uniform rates to apply throughout the country. He also favours the removal of the casting vote that may be exercised by the independent chairman of a JLC. Existing legislation is not an obstacle to the introduction of uniform rates throughout the country, nor to the amalgamation of JLCs. The key issue here has been the degree of willingness of the parties involved in the JLCs to make changes or to engage. Deputies will be aware that regional differentiation in private sector wage rates was traditionally a feature of the economy. Historically, there has been some ebb and flow between reliance on national rates or on regional pay differentiation, depending upon the strength or weakness of the economy and the labour market. The situation in the catering sector has been referred to by many Deputies and was to the fore last year. There are two separate JLCs in the catering sector, one covering the greater Dublin region and the second the rest of the country. However, contrary to the impression conveyed during the debate, uniform rates are now applied in the catering sector throughout the entire country, including pay rates and the Sunday premium. The parties involved in the two separate committees reached agreement earlier this year on an amalgamation of the two JLCs. In advance of that amalgamation, the parties representing the employer and trade union interests on the two committees decided, however, that they would first ensure the implementation of a uniform set of terms and conditions before proceeding with formal institutional change. I agree that this was a sensible course of action and I see no need to interfere in the modernisation process that is already under way. With regard to the composition of the JLCs and the voting rights of the independent chairman, I would be concerned that altering the role of the independent chairman could undermine the JLC system and might only serve to make it more difficult to arrive at decisions and lengthen the process of adjusting rates in response to changing economic conditions. I believe this is appropriate too in the context of some remarks made this morning about the composition of joint labour committees. JLCs comprise people appointed by the Labour Court as representative of employers and workers in designated sectors. Before appointing these representatives, the Labour Court must consult the relevant employer and trade union organisations. The people around the table have been urged by me to become more engaged with the wider sector as opposed to specific employer and union interests. We have seen some success in that regard in some JLCs recently. There was some comment this morning about the low penetration of union membership, but it is appropriate that they should seek to take a wider representative role, in representing workers who may or may not be members of a union. The JLC system provides an opportunity for this, I believe. Deputy Mary White queried why we were imposing a maximum age limit of 65 and I agree that the case for fixing an age limit, as distinct from the normal limit to any term of office, should be looked at again. We will refer to the committee on that. Many colleagues, including my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Kelleher, and a predecessor in this office, Deputy Fahey, as well as many other speakers, have urged that our priority should be in taking action to contain costs and make the country more competitive. We had contributions this morning from Deputy Costello about rent costs, but we must recognise that labour costs in Ireland are high and this issue must be addressed. 46 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 11 February 2010. 2009: Second Stage (Resumed)

The Government is taking a number of actions to accelerate the process of recovering our cost competitiveness across the entire economy. It is sure to be a painful adjustment, but a reduction in unit labour costs delivered through pay reform will strengthen our long-term competitiveness. I have no doubt that having a job is the best route out of poverty. Having work can prevent people from falling into poverty in the future. Employment enables people to provide for themselves, their families, communities and future retirement. We need to have measures that protect vulnerable workers in situations where they may be unable to protect themselves or to avail of their full entitlements. Workers are most at risk when they work in an environment where the risk of being denied employment rights is high and where employees may not have the capacity or means to protect themselves from such abuse. There are good and poor employers in every sector, but data provided to me by NERA, the National Employment Rights Authority, suggests that problems seem to occur more frequently in some sectors such as retail, hotels, restaurants, construction, security and cleaning, which are those often governed by joint labour committees. We must keep under continuing review the mechanisms put in place to protect these vulnerable workers. Certainly, we must from time to time re-examine, as we have done under section 8, the way in which we calibrate the economic and social considerations that should be taken into account when fixing or adjusting minimum rates backed by the force of law. There has been much comment in this debate about the “inability to pay” mechanism. Many Deputies have expressed doubts about the adequacy of the safeguards that can be put in place to protect workers under the proposed mechanism to enable employers, subject to certain conditions, to seek a temporary exemption from the strict application of EROs, employment regulation orders, and REAs, registered employment agreements. I will be very clear. The mechanism under discussion already exists in terms of the legislation for the minimum wage. The lectures we have received from some Deputies on the minimum wage seem somewhat ignorant given the provision to which I have referred which covers those workers paid the minimum wage. The provision is for those subject to the agreement under discussion today. Consultations are proceeding with employer and trade union interests on the best approach to facilitating such a form of temporary relief in cases where employers face short-term financial difficulties. This is a key consideration in terms of safeguarding the jobs and entitlements of workers affected and serves to ensure that any such mechanism would be once-off and time-limited. The approach to enabling employers to make claims based on their economic and financial situation will depend on whether the employers in difficulty are covered by employment regulation orders or registered employment agreements. Different approaches will apply in the design of the “inability to pay” mechanism in view of the different contexts presented by the EROs and REAs respectively. Many Deputies, including Deputies Penrose and Costello, highlighted the significance of REAs as collective agreements under international law. I appreciate fully the status of REAs as collective agreements, voluntarily agreed by the parties directly concerned. I propose to ensure that the parties to a registered employment agreement should, accordingly, retain discretion in the matter of whether to vary the application of their agreement through the inclusion of a prescribed inability to pay mechanism. It was originally envisaged that the approach to introducing an inability to pay mechanism would be modelled on the provision in the National Minimum Wage Act, 2000, to which I have referred previously. I am considering the scope for incorporating additional procedures and safeguards in the proposed inability to pay provision in the light of some of the issues that have been raised during the debate, as well as those identified in the course of consultations held with the social partners. 47 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Dara Calleary.]

I have noted the concerns raised by Deputies Varadkar, Penrose, English and Costello regarding the dangers of unfair cost competition and the resulting consequences to maintain a level playing field in sectors where wage costs are a major component of overall costs. I am considering requiring that the Labour Court, as part of its examination of a claim for a temporary exemption, should have to consider in advance whether any particular exemption could, if granted, place other employers covered by the same ERO at a competitive disadvantage and result in the displacement of workers employed in competing undertakings. Deputies Penrose, Bannon and Costello expressed concern that pressure might be exerted on workers to agree to their employer’s claim for an exemption and that workers might be afraid they could be victim- ised for failing to give consent to an exemption. In my approach to framing an inability to pay amendment, I propose to examine ways of protecting workers from any improper pressure of that kind. I am also considering requiring that the Labour Court, as part of its examination of a claim for a temporary exemption, should have regard to whether the consent of the majority of employees has been freely given. 2oIn’clock response to many representations made to me by several organisations representing sectoral interests, I am prepared to explore how an application for a derogation from an ERO or an REA might be entertained in the absence of consent on the part of a majority of the employees. It will be recalled that under previous social partnership agreements on private sector inability to pay disputes, such disputes could be referred, in the event of a failure to reach agreement at enterprise level, to the Labour Relations Commission and, if unresolved there, to the Labour Court for an investigation. However, any safeguards that would apply in such circumstances would have to be even more stringent than a given situation in which the exemption is supported by an agreement made with the employees at the workplace level. Several Deputies, including Deputies Clune, Costello and Fleming, referred to the number of workers affected by JLCs, joint labour committees. I may raise this matter with the Labour Relations Commission, which has powers under the Industrial Relations Act 1990 to undertake periodic review to establish whether these orders should be amended and what volume of workers would be affected. I thank Deputies from all sides of the House for their input to the debate and I thank Senators for their input before Christmas. We will now bring the Bill to Committee Stage. I commend the Bill to the House. Question put and agreed to.

Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Referral to Select Committee. Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): I move:

That the Bill be referred to the Select Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, in accordance with Standing Order 122(1) and paragraph 1(a)(i) of the Orders of Reference of that committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I move: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” I am pleased to present the Criminal Procedure Bill to the House. This very important Bill is a core element of the Government’s Justice for Victims initiative. It has been motivated 48 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage primarily by my desire to improve the standing of victims of crime in the trial process. Its main elements are, therefore, focused on achieving this objective. They relate to victim impact evidence, the question of re-trials following certain acquittals and changes in the rules of evidence. I will deal in more detail with each of these shortly but first I wish to put on record my appreciation for the contribution made by the Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group and its chairman, Dr. Gerard Hogan, to the debate on the suitability of certain criminal law procedures in certain circumstances. The group’s analysis and recommendations inform many of the Bill’s provisions. The Bill has 38 sections and a schedule of relevant offences. Part 1 deals with standard matters such as commencement and expenses. Part 2 reforms the law on victim impact evidence. It revises and expands the current law, namely, section 5 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993. The key change is the new and much wider interpretation of who is a victim. In future, the term will apply in certain circumstances to the family of the direct victim, as well as to the direct victim. A wide definition is given to ‘family’; it includes the extended family as well as the range of other relationships that arise. The victim impact procedures will continue to have two elements. As a first, but mandatory step, the court must still consider victim impact evidence at the sentencing stage in any trial in which there has been a conviction for an offence covered by section 5. The judge may be assisted at this stage by impact reports, often from a medical or other specialist and may hear evidence relating to those reports. I remind Deputies that when compiling an impact report, the extended view on who is a victim will apply, with the result that the impact on the family can also be taken into account. However, the benefits of the expanded interpretation of a victim are most clearly seen in the operation of the second element, the making of an oral statement by the victim about the impact of the offence. This element operates at the discretion of the victim but when requested by the victim, the court must permit him or her to make that statement. The most notable benefit arises in homicide cases. Until now, families in homicide cases have relied on the goodwill of the court when they sought permission to make a contribution at the sentencing stage. Now, they have a statutory right, if they so request, to be heard. This right is also extended to members of the family in cases where a victim is, as a result of the offence, too ill to deliver a statement. I take account also of the particular needs of children, persons having a mental disorder or persons who are especially vulnerable, for example, victims of sexual or domestic violence. I am providing that a family member may speak on behalf of a child under 14 years or a person with a mental disorder. A child or a person with a mental disorder or any other person who obtains the permission of the court may deliver the statement via a television link. For the public at large, the victim impact procedure is, in effect, the oral statement made by the victim. However, some victims are not, for whatever reason, inclined to make an oral statement. Therefore, I am providing that no inference is to be drawn that would suggest the absence of an oral statement indicates there was little or no impact on the victim. This will relieve the pressure on those not inclined, for whatever reason, to deliver an oral statement. The Bill provides the court with powers to prohibit the publication of any inappropriate remarks made in the course of an oral statement. Those remarks may arise out of frustration with the formalities of the trial process, as one can perhaps understand. However, it would be unacceptable if evidence not presented at the trial, for example, could become public through a victim impact statement. The new powers will limit any damage done by such remarks. As I indicated in the other House, I intend to table an amendment on Committee Stage to expand the range of offences in respect of which the sentencing judge must take account of 49 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] victim impact evidence. The changes I have outlined draw on the experience gained since 1993. They reflect a more sympathetic approach to victims while maintaining fairness in the trial process, as we are obliged to ensure under the Constitution. Parts 3 and 4 of the Bill outline the circumstances in which acquittals may be set aside and new trials ordered. Part 3 deals with cases where new and compelling evidence arises or where the original trial was tainted. These two circumstances should be seen as important new exceptions to the rule againSt double jeopardy. Part 4 represents an extension of the limited appeal powers currently available to the prosecution. Henceforth, where the acquittal arises from a ruling on a point of law by the trial judge that the DPP believes to be erroneous or where a conviction is quashed but no retrial is ordered, the prosecution may seek to clarify the law, as at present, but may also seek to have the acquittal set aside and a new trial ordered. Returning to the proposals in Part 3, the double jeopardy rule holds that an acquittal is a final decision and an acquitted person may not be pursued again in respect of the same offence. Currently, the State cannot reopen a case following an acquittal, regardless of the circumstances in which it was arrived at. However, a convicted person has full rights of appeal againSt both conviction and sentence. The House will agree that we should review these arrangements. The purpose of a review must be to enhance the rights of the other parties without diminishing a defendant’s rights. There is a public interest in respecting the finality of proceedings. The public interest would not be served if every acquittal were potentially subject to being set aside; that would diminish the integrity of the criminal process and would deprive acquitted persons of their entitlement to the presumption of innocence. Nevertheless, acquittals that are the result of perjury or the concealment of evidence, for instance, cannot be said to be deserved. The Bill is, therefore, targeted at and limited to those most undeserved acquittals. The procedures to be followed for applications for retrials under Part 3 are set out in sections 8, 9 and 10. It is a rigorous process. The DPP may apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal for a retrial where he believes the acquittal was not merited. It is for that court, or, in the event of an appeal, the Supreme Court, to decide whether a new trial should take place. The DPP may apply on one occasion only. If the DPP’s application is based on the availability of new evidence, it must be compelling. It cannot have been available at the first trial and it must be clear that even with the exercise of due diligence by the Garda and the prosecution, it could not have been presented at that trial. Critically, it must be of a standard that implicates the person with a high degree of probability in the commission of the relevant offence. However, the guilt or innocence of the accused remains a matter to be determined by the jury in the new trial. On Committee Stage, I will be proposing some helpful clarifications to the provisions on new and compelling evidence. It will generally be necessary for the Garda to investigate new evidence before the DPP can decide whether to apply for a retrial and its report on the investigation can be expected to feature prominently in many applications. Sections 15 to 18, inclusive, set out the powers available to the Garda for investigations under this Bill. It will be noted that, since the procedure is exceptional, the Garda may exercise those powers in respect of an acquitted person only where it has prior judicial authorisation to do so. I have used the term “relevant offence” a number of times. An application for a retrial that is based on new and compelling evidence may be brought only where the offence is a “relevant offence”. For the most part, relevant offences are offences that carry a mandatory or discretion- ary life sentence. The Schedule contains the full list of the relevant offences. It will be noted 50 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage that cases where special verdicts are recorded under the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 are exempted from the scope of this category. Limiting the Bill’s scope to the most serious offences underlines the measured approach I am adopting. A retrial can be sought in any instance where the case was tried on indictment if the acquittal is tainted. A tainted acquittal is one that results from an offence againSt the administration of justice, in other words, where it results from bribery, perjury, intimidation or any activity designed to pervert the course of justice. Two conditions apply before an application can be brought under this heading. There must be a conviction for an offence — perjury, for example — and there must be reasonable grounds to believe that the offence affected the outcome of the trial. The acquitted person’s rights are respected. The acquitted person is put on notice of the DPP’s application for a retrial and may attend and participate in the hearing. Legal aid will be available. If an acquitted person fails to attend and the court decides that it is in the interests of justice that it proceed with the application, it may order a retrial and may also issue a warrant for the arrest of the person. Before granting an application for a retrial, the court must be satisfied not only that the DPP has complied with the requirements as set out in the Bill but, crucially, that it would be in the interest of justice to order a retrial. The integrity of any retrial must be protected. Care must be taken to avoid publicity in advance of a trial that might influence potential jurors. The court may, therefore, order restrictions on attendance at and reporting on the hearing of the DPP’s application. The restrictions can be maintained until the new trial has concluded. Any decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal on an application for a retrial may be appealed to the Supreme Court on a point of law. “With prejudice” appeals under Part 4 are by the DPP or, in some cases, the Attorney General, to the Supreme Court againSt a ruling on a point of law by a trial judge that the DPP believes to be mistaken and where the ruling can be shown to have resulted in an acquittal. I propose an amendment to section 23 to ensure the basis for “with prejudice” appeals is set out very clearly. An appeal might relate to rulings on the admissibility of evidence, for example. Until now, such appeals were available only on a “without prejudice” basis; in other words, the outcome did not alter the position of the acquitted person. “With prejudice” appeals go a step further by seeking to set aside the acquittal and to have the case retried. The procedures for applications under Part 4 are similar to those I have outlined for cases under Part 3, including, when necessary, the same restrictions on reporting. A retrial in any of the three scenarios covered by the Bill will entail a full rehearing of the case. If convicted, the person is liable to the prescribed penalty for the offence in question. The usual rules on access to legal aid will apply. Before I leave the subject of retrials, I want to deal with the important question of retrospective effect. The Bill provides for the possibility of a retrial that is based on new evidence or where the acquittal was tainted but only where the person was charged with the offence on or after the commencement of the new legislation and was subsequently acquitted. It is the date of acquittal rather than the date of commission of the offence that is the key consideration. In “with prejudice” appeals, the possibility of bringing an appeal will arise where the acquittal takes place on or after the commencement day. Therefore, in all three scenarios, the acquittal must occur after the commencement date. Deputies will have noted from my remarks that the Bill does not have general retrospective effect. They will also be aware that there is a general presumption in criminal law againSt retrospection. Many are aware that Article 15 of the Constitution and Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights both make clear that an act that was not an offence when 51 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] committed may not later be regarded as an offence. Despite that background, the relevance of Article 15 or the European Convention on Human Rights to the issues raised by this Bill is limited. What is very relevant is a different but equally important issue, namely, the separation of powers. Everyone in this House is aware of how fundamental a principle it is in our constitutional structure. Let me spell out as clearly as I can how the issue arises. We start by recognising that a verdict is a decision of a court and of a court only. Under the current law, the effect of a verdict that acquits a person is that the person is free from further proceedings in respect of that offence. Any retrospective change in that position would amount to interference by the Oireachtas with the workings and independence of the courts. That, of course, would be a serious infringement of the separation of powers. It is just not permitted by the Constitution in my opinion and that of the Attorney General. There is substantial jurisprudence in this jurisdiction to support the advice I have received on this issue. I am anxious to maximise the impact of the legislation provided, of course, that we respect the constitutional position. I am, therefore, pleased to indicate that I have been advised that the scope of the Bill can be extended to cases charged before but tried after its commencement. I propose to introduce an amendment to that effect. This is a small extension but it is an extension nonetheless. I listened with interest to some of the comments made by Senators in this regard when the Bill was before the Upper House. I wish to deal with the changes in the rules of evidence contained in sections 34 to 36, inclusive. Section 34 is the most significant in this regard. It amends the Criminal Justice (Evidence) Act 1924 and addresses the anomaly whereby there are no consequences where the defence impugns the good character of a person who is not a witness. A witness can, of course, defend himself or herself while on the stand but the difficulty arises where the person whose character has been impugned is the victim and has, as a result of the offence, died or is so ill that he or she is unavailable as a witness for the prosecution. The amendment will ensure that a defendant who impugns a victim’s character risks having his own character examined. He may, in other words, find that he has what is termed “dropped the shield”. This change will prevent further abuse and anguish for, in particular, the families of victims who were either killed or seriously injured. I should point out that a defendant is not prevented from raising bona fide defences such as provocation or self-defence, even where to do so might suggest a degree of culpability on the part of the victim. In other changes, section 35 requires prior notice from the defence of an intention to call its own expert evidence. The new requirement will enable the prosecution to better assess material that is often complex. Section 36 establishes a new procedure designed to facilitate the earlier return of property held as evidence. Such property often belongs to victims and, until now, they have been at the loss of it until proceedings have been completed. The new measure will ease that difficulty in many cases. A number of Members will be aware of the type of cases to which I refer in this regard. In other provisions relating to procedural matters, sections 31 and 32 remove the requirement that a convicted person must obtain a certificate from the trial court or the leave of the Court of Criminal Appeal before being allowed to appeal to that court. Section 33 amends section 29 of the Courts of Justice Act 1924 and clarifies when a defence appeal may be brought to the Supreme Court even where the Court of Criminal Appeal has already granted a retrial. Section 37 clarifies the time limits for the preparation of the book of evidence. Section 38 adds the 52 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage common law offence of breach of the peace to the schedule to the Criminal Justice Act 1951, thus clarifying that it may be tried as a summary or an indictable offence, as appropriate. I have already identified the Committee Stage amendments that arise directly from the Bill before the House. In addition, however, two small amendments arise from recent judgements, relating to the grounds on which a failure by an accused to appear on the appointed remand date may be excused and the circumstances where bench warrants may be issued. This Bill will bring about much needed reform. It places the victims of crime on a new and stronger footing within the trial process. In addition, it opens up the possibility of retrials for those whose acquittals are undeserved and it corrects an unacceptable anomaly in the rules of evidence. The integrity of the criminal justice system will benefit from the changes I am proposing. The Bill undoubtedly breaks new ground but it does so in a way which is measured and which respects long-established and cherished legal principles. I commend the Bill to the House.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: I welcome the Bill on behalf of the Fine Gael Party. Measures to reform the criminal law procedures are overdue, particularly in view of the fact that three years have passed since the review group on the balance in the criminal law — the Hogan committee — presented its report to the Government. I join the Minister in complimenting the Hogan committee on its good work. I also join him in complimenting the chairman of that committee, Professor Gerard Hogan, who was probably the chief architect of its report. In that report, the group states, “Some element of re-balancing of the existing rules is required to enable the courts to arrive at a just and fair result in criminal cases”. That is the basis on which we, as the legislators who introduce the rules and regulations that are interpreted by the courts and lawyers, wish to proceed. Many legal rules were developed prior to the universal availability of legal aid in criminal cases and for those unable to pay for representation out of their own means. The report also states:

In addition, some jurisprudence since the 1960s has had the effect of extending the protections available to defendants, including the development of an extensive exclusionary rule where evidence is generally excluded where the accused’s constitutional rights have been infringed. Criminal defendants now also have the benefit of statutory human rights protection under the European Convention of Human Rights Act 2003.

The group concluded that these and other developments may have had the effect of gradually tilting the balance “in favour of the criminal defendant”. I welcome the Minister’s response to the assertion on the part of the expert group that a serious problem existed within the criminal justice system. It was alarming and significant that the group formed the view that the balance had tipped in favour of criminal defendants. What we and the Minister need to do is, in further- ance of the common good, tilt the balance back in favour of victims. It is clear that there is a pressing need for reform. The Bill reflects many of the recommendations made by the review group. In general, the Fine Gael Party is in favour of the Bill. I am pleased the Minister has accepted the argument from those on this side of the House with regard to the need to provide, in certain circumstances, meaningful rights for the victims of crime and their families. Last year, Deputy Shatter and I brought forward the Victims Rights Bill. I regret the fact that the Minister did not take the opportunity to deal in a more comprehensive way with many of the provisions contained therein. During the debate on the Bill to which I refer — I reiter- ated the point last week — I stated that those of us on this side of the House do not profess 53 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Charles Flanagan.] to possess any great measure of expertise. We do not have access to the same level of support — legal or otherwise — as that which is available to the Minister from the Attorney General and officials in his Department.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy has access to Google.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: However, there are occasions on which proposals of a significant nature emanate from this side of the House. It is regrettable that the Minister, perhaps more than any of his predecessors, is inclined to play the narrow, partisan political card on almost all occasions. That gives rise to a measure of cynicism on the part of the public. If the Minister had been present at yesterday’s meeting of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights, he would have witnessed a robust defence of the powers of that committee by such colleagues of his as Deputies Treacy and Thomas Byrne. The latter extolled the powers of the committee in the context of influencing the Government and amending legislation. As the Minister is aware, in order for amendments to be accepted by the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights they must first attract his approval or blessing.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The position is the same for any committee. It is called democracy.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: That approval or blessing is rarely, if ever, forthcoming.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: That is not the case.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Minister did a disservice to himself and his office in the context of the manner in which he ridiculed and dismissed the Bill brought forward by Deputy Shatter and I on the occasion to which I refer. I remind him that the purpose of said Bill was to give the victims of crime comprehensive statutory rights under our law for the first time. Its provisions required that the State and its agencies should inform the victims of crime of the appropriate and necessary services available to them. In addition, victims would be kept fully informed of progress made in the investigation of crimes reported by them, the progress before the courts of any prosecution initiated and the outcome of any court proceedings relating to an alleged or convicted offender in respect of the offence committed. It must also include the outcome of any court proceedings relating to an alleged or convicted offender in respect of the offence. Moreover, following conviction, victims should be entitled to make representations on the application of a convicted offender for parole or release. The Fine Gael Bill sought to introduce a greater level of transparency and accountability into this aspect of the criminal justice system. Recently, a case was brought to my attention in which a convicted criminal, jailed for a serious assault on a young woman, confronted his victim at a supermarket checkout three years after he was jailed. The unfortunate victim had no information that the perpetrator of a vicious and serious assault upon her had been released from prison prior to the completion of his full sentence. The Minister will agree this is unacceptable. Whatever measures are necessary must be taken to ensure such situations do not occur. It is essential legislation is adequately and properly enforced and resourced. The Fine Gael Bill provided that an onus be placed on State agencies to provide information to the victim or the victim’s family on the supports they can provide. It also contains provisions ensuring information was given to victims and their families on the matter of the investigation; the proceedings; the range of penalties, ASBOs — few of which have been issued by the courts despite the Minister’s assertions to the contrary; parole board applications by a convicted person; and the anticipated release date of a convicted person. It sought to ensure victims had 54 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage an opportunity to make representations to court in respect of bail applications by the accused; victims would be made aware of any breaches of bail conditions, if bail were granted; and the opportunity to make representations to the parole board or the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on the release date of a prisoner. The Minister rightly referred to the constitutional independence of the courts. However, there is a grey area in how the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform can exercise a quasi-judicial function in signing off on parole or early release. If the Minister is to remain independent of sentencing matters, then allowing the Minster to exercise judgment on the commuting of a prisoner’s sentence runs contrary to this. This is a matter that should be examined on Committee Stage.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Does Deputy Charles Flanagan want to have non-elected persons decide then?

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Fine Gael Bill would place the commission for the support of victims of crime on a statutory basis for the first time. In the case of sexual assault cases, victims would have the option of making the names of the accused public while theirs remained anonymous. The current position is that for the accused’s name to be made public the victim must also go public, an unfair provision that places the victim in an invidious position. The Bill proposes the establishment of a victim’s charter of rights which may be asserted by way of application to the Ombudsman. This would not, however, entitle a victim to claim in a civil court for this right but neither would it prejudice his or her right to claim againSt the State for negligence in the normal way. The effect of such a claim is limited to the commission for the support of victims of crime being informed of the breach of the right and that no other penalty is imposed. It is regrettable many of these important provisions have been omitted from the Criminal Procedure Bill 2009. I hope that on Committee Stage we might have a more mature and constructive debate than we have had. Deputy Alan Shatter is keenly aware of the victim’s status — or lack thereof — in this jurisdiction. He has worked on the Fine Gael Bill for many years which is more comprehensive than the Government’s. Although the period of engagement promised by the Minister would have allowed him to come forward with comprehensive victims’ rights-based criminal procedure legislation, he has not. The Minister seems to have a closed mind on this matter. I hope his colleagues, Deputies Thomas Byrne and Treacy, on the justice committee will have an opportunity and be better placed than I am to open the Mini- ster’s closed mind. He has adopted a narrow-minded approach, the result of which will be a poor service to the victims of crime and their families who will ultimately lose out. However, I welcome provisions in Part 2 regarding victim impact evidence and the decision to extend to family members of victims of crime the entitlement to make an oral statement or a victim impact statement at a sentencing hearing. I note the provisions dealing with double jeopardy which deal also with such issues as intimidation, errors in trial and new evidence emerging which may not have been available at the time of the original trial. We must ensure this welcome provision is robust enough to withstand any constitutional challenge. Speaking on this Bill in the Seanad, my colleague, Senator Eugene Regan referred to the constitutional basis of the rule againSt double jeopardy, the provisions of the European Con- vention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, now part of European Community law, and the necessity to ensure this Bill is compatible with these fundamental legal texts. There is an obvious need to strike a balance between the rights of the accused and those of the community. It is most desirable that guilty parties who have escaped conviction as a result 55 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Charles Flanagan.] of, for example, a lack of scientific evidence such as DNA evidence or through witness intimidation, are held to account. In this regard, I welcome the publication of the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Bill 2010 and look forward to debating its provisions in the near future. Judges frequently refer to the need for action from the Legislature to make the law certain. The rule concerning double jeopardy is one that must be addressed by the Oireachtas, taking cognisance of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the provisions of the Constitution. Many lawyers have expressed concern at what they see as an ongoing erosion of rights by the Government in recent years. The Minister championed the recent package of criminal justice legislation on the basis he was tightening up the law to ensure greater levels of conviction. In this regard he invoked the powers, practice and procedures of the Special Criminal Court. Of course we must proceed with the utmost caution when making changes to age old principles concerning the right to a fair trial, and concerning the golden thread of the criminal justice system, namely the right for an accused party to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. In this regard, there is a considerable onus on us, notwithstanding what members of the Judiciary might say from time to time regarding changes in legislation. We must be absolutely certain here in this House that poor resourcing is not holding back convictions before we change legislation and examine legislative reform. I do not accept that by changing legislation we will deal with matters comprehensively. On calls for changing of the legislation and press conferences by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in the presence of the Garda Commissioner following the recent continuous litany of serious and organised crime, legislation alone will not address the issue. We would be doing the public a considerable disservice if we were to take the view that legislation is the answer rather than the matter of resourcing. A case in point is the lack of resources in the area of DNA evidence. I would strongly argue that lack of resourcing in that area may have prevented convictions being secured in the past It may be not so much the need to change our legislation but rather the lack of will to apply appropriate resources that would make the fundamental difference and achieve a higher level of conviction. As I have stated previously, I would urge the Minister with this legislation, as with any other, to look at resourcing as a first resort and, perhaps, changing the law as a secondary resort. The balance in the Criminal Law Review Group recommended an exacting threshold in respect of the DPP requesting a retrial and to preserve the integrity of our criminal justice system, it is essential that in the legislation we provide such a threshold. I would be supportive, as I have stated in the past, of the idea of allowing the DPP to have a right of appeal to the Supreme Court on a with-prejudice basis againSt an acquittal, where the acquittal arises from an erroneous ruling by a lower court on a point of law. I note what the Minister stated in his speech about the need to set out clearly the grounds, which are not set out in the Bill as initiated or, indeed, as passed by the Seanad. It is important that not only do we set out clearly the grounds, criteria or qualifications, but also, as the Minister underlined, the guarantee of legal representation and the covering thereof. I would also support the right of appeal by the DPP againSt a decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal not to order a retrial following the quashing of a conviction. Section 19 of the Bill again reflects what my party has been saying on the admissibility of evidence. We introduced a Bill reforming the law in respect of admissibility of evidence last year but, regrettably, it was subject to the hammer blow of the current Minister. I welcome the introduction of greater measure of flexibility regarding admissibility and measures to provide 56 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage that evidence that may be obtained by means of some technical error in procedure by the Garda Síochána will not be deemed automatically precluded as evidence in a trial. I also welcome the provisions to expand the procedure regarding evidence by video link, especially where children are concerned. I was pleased with, and congratulate the Government on, the fine complex which is the criminal courts building, which we had an opportunity to visit in recent times. The layout of rooms and the conditions there are second to none. Doubtless had the building not been constructed during the course of time in which it was, it probably would fall subject to the straitened economic circumstances into which the Government has led us. Its conditions include the video link, the children’s suite, the witness suite, and the essential provision that defendants are kept separate in so far as possible from witnesses. Only this week a rather chilling experience was brought to my attention where a witness in the course of a court action openly issued a threat in the form of intimidation to a witness within the court building, almost in front of the judge. Undoubtedly, this must not be tolerated in the criminal justice system. On the matter of the absence of information to victims, the Minister has been particularly strong on the need to ensure that victims are fully informed as to the process. Only this week, an extremely disturbing case has been brought to my attention where, in the aftermath of an horrific murder of a young girl in Cork in 2002, the person responsible pleaded guilty, was convicted by the courts on a guilty plea some short time thereafter and was given a life sentence and a consequent 15 year sentence for the attempted murder of another person. Eight years later, this matter is still before the courts. Eight years later, and having regard to the fact that the person who committed the murder entered a guilty plea, the family of the girl who was murdered have not been fully informed as to the proceedings. Who speaks for the family? Certainly, it is not the defendant or his legal team who are engaged in the lengthy appeal process, not the Attorney General and not the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the latter two of whom are named parties in the proceedings. I wonder where is the redress for a family who merely seek to be fully informed as to the process. It appears that it is not the job of the Attorney General, it is not the job of the Chief State Solicitor and it is not the job of the Minister. Whose job is it? When we state that we need to include the victim in the process and to ensure that the victim is fully informed, I understand how the gardaí might do it in certain circumstances but in the case to which I refer, where the matter has been subject to various legal arguments in different court fora over an eight year period and is still not concluded, one must ask the question, who represents the victim in such circumstances, particularly when it is a traumatised family who have yet to see closure on what was a horrific murder of a daughter and a sister? It is essential that we not only enhance by way of legislation victims’ rights and build into our laws procedures that will bolster the rights of the victim, but also ensure that the legislation is proper and adequately resourced. This is an important Bill. It encompasses a great deal of criminal practice and procedure. There are issues which will require greater scrutiny and amendment on Committee Stage. I look forward to re-engaging with the legislation then.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I join the Minister and Deputy Charles Flanagan in commending the work of the review group and Professor Gerard Hogan. I am glad to be able to give a broad welcome to this Bill which introduces some reforms of the criminal justice system and which has clearly been informed by the proposals of the review group, although the proposals therein are not identical to the review group’s in all respects. There are matters that will require to be teased out on Committee Stage but, in principle, I welcome the prominence given to revision of the existing statutory provisions for victim impact 57 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.] statements and to widening the range of persons who will be entitled to make such statements. However, I have some questions for the Minister in that regard. The rule againSt double jeopardy, meaning that a person acquitted of an offence may not be retried, is a long-standing precept of the common law probably best outlined by Lord Wil- berforce who stated:

. . .any determination of disputable fact may, the law recognises, be imperfect: the law aims at providing the best and safest solution compatible with human fallibility, and having reached that solution, it closes the book. The law knows, and we all know, that sometimes fresh material may be found, which perhaps might lead to a different result, but, in the interests of peace, certainty, and security, it prevents further inquiry. It is said that in doing this, the law is preferring justice to truth. That may be so: those values cannot always coincide.

In addition to the common law, the rule is also enshrined, as the Minister remarked, in the protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights. The rule againSt double jeopardy was amended in England and Wales earlier in this decade and in a number of other common law jurisdictions. Irish jurisprudence shows that the rule againSt double jeopardy has caused some misgivings down the years, and it is interesting to trace the law on this issue. I presume it is in response to that that we have Part 3 of this Bill where the Director of Public Prosecutions will be entitled to apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal for an order quashing a person’s acquittal and ordering a retrial. As I understand it, the Director of Public Prosecutions may apply for a retrial in two circumstances — where new and compelling evidence has become available and where an acquittal is tainted. With the development of DNA and in the current environment where gangland feuding and serious criminal trials are of such a character, it is possible that the occasional acquittal is tainted. The tests that will apply in the legislation seem to be properly restrictive and rigorous. Most reasonable people would assent to departure from the rule on double jeopardy in the circumstances prescribed. For example, in the matter of new and compelling evidence, it must be evidence that is reliable and substantial in character which directly implicates the acquitted person and that the evidence was not adduced in the earlier proceedings and could not have been so adduced. I do not believe anyone could take serious issue with the court being empowered to make an order for a tainted acquittal to be quashed and the person retried in the limited circumstances prescribed. An offence againSt the administration of justice in this context means an offence under section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999 — in other words, intimidation; bribery, corruption, interference with a juror, a witness, a judge or a court official; attempting to pervert the course of justice; perjury; the making of a false affidavit; or conspiring or inciting another person to commit any of the above offences. At the same time, the recommendation of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties that the Bill should be amended in order that the new provisions apply only to the most serious indictable crimes has a great deal of merit. The Irish Council for Civil Liberties also recommends that a statutory witness protection scheme be established. The Minister will know I published a Private Members’ Bill in that regard. It would appear my Bill is being resisted by the Garda Síochána, and perhaps it has good reasons or good arguments for doing so. However, I have not been told what they are. I recall the Garda Síochána similarly resisted the Private Members’ Bill I published on Garda surveillance. Again, perhaps the Garda had good arguments but it never made them public, 58 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage nor did it relay them to me and, strangely, they were withdrawn as soon as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform needed to be seen to be doing something. I have great concerns about the practice in the House, more so with this Minister than with some of his colleagues and some of he predecessors, where one publishes a Private Members’ Bill and arguments are dredged up stating that we cannot do something because it would only make the situation worse, that the Minister is advised by the Attorney General that it is not permissible or that the Garda Síochána is resisting it. A year later after another atrocity, if not the same Bill but one with the same intent is given expression in law which was out of bounds one year earlier. I have never been able to get my head around that. Is it that we are just enacting law to be seen to be doing something but that it is envisaged that much of the law will never be invoked? It is a real concern. I do not know which solutions are best but I have grave reservations about the adequacy of the measures in place for the management of the non-statutory witness protection programme. I have direct knowledge of serious criminal trials where innocent persons were required on pain of incarceration to give evidence and they did so in fear of their lives. These persons have paid a huge price for doing their duty by the State, including loss of employment, break-up of marriages and dislocation from their own environment, and they believe their lives are at risk. The Minister must turn his mind to this issue and the obligation on the State to provide reasonable ongoing protection for citizens who have done their duty by the State at such personal cost and who live in ongoing fear of their lives. There is no statutory witness protection programme and it seems to happen on a fairly haphazard basis. 3oBy’clock its nature I cannot go into it in the House but I suspect the Minister is probably in possession of the same knowledge as I am. He knows that as a result of happenstance one can find oneself, in effect, compelled to give evidence in a serious criminal trial. One may feel it is one’s first duty as a citizen and, at great risk to oneself, come forward to give evidence. One may also be obliged by the State, on pain of incarceration, to come to court and give evidence. One may believe one is on an informal witness protection programme. I am aware of a number of cases where witnesses did their duty and now find themselves in circumstances where they lost their employment, cannot go to work where they always did, spent some time out of this country, have come back and are fearful their place of abode will become public, and genuinely fear for their lives. If I had the answers I would tell the Minister what they are — it is probable he is also having difficulty in deciding what are the best solutions. In an environment where cold-blooded, vicious crimes are committed regularly and so much of the valuable work done by the Garda Síochána depends on it being able to produce a witness in court who can give testimony to having seen the crime committed, which is critical for a conviction, we have a responsibility to protect such people. That is not necessarily happening at the current time. The Minister’s contribution contained substantial references to the issue of retrospection and he set out a cogent riposte. I presume he has done so because he has been subject to representations from colleagues in the House on this issue. Deputy Sherlock raised this issue with me on a number of occasions. I suspect I recognise similarities in a case adduced by Deputy Flanagan. The issue which arises is that of retrospection. The Minister, on the basis of the separation of powers, seems to have the view that there is a constitutional impediment to dealing with the issue of retrospection. I do not know what will be the effect of the limited amendment which the Minister promises us. From the Minister’s comments, I understand he can extend the scope of the Bill to cases charged before but tried after the commencement of the legislation. I have no knowledge of how many cases such a provision is likely to capture. Colleagues who have made represen- 59 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.] tations to me on this point argue that similar legislation has been made retrospective in the United Kingdom, or as it relates to England and Wales. The Minister will draw my attention to the fact that we have a written Constitution, the separation of powers is paramount and that is something with which such a provision would interfere. It is something I would like to tease out on Committee Stage because a number of colleagues from various parties in the House are concerned about this aspect of the Bill. The attention given to victims and their being brought more to the forefront is welcome. I welcome it and agree with the remarks of Deputy Flanagan. Section 5 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 introduced a procedure for victim impact statements, which is the provision under which we have been operating. I understand the review group took the view that previous difficulties with victim impact statements should be ameliorated in the interests of doing justice to all victims of crime and that the statutory provision should be recast so as to permit the persons most directly affected by an offence, such as the next of kin of a deceased victim of crime, to give evidence at the sentencing stage. However, this would be subject to the discretion of the court where the impact on the person was too remote or where more than a very limited class of immediate relatives wished to make a statement. Some flexibility in judicial discretion would be of benefit to deal with situations where a deceased victim left an unmarried or same-sex partner behind or where more than one separate family member wished to make a statement. In order to avoid any possibility of inappropriate use of statements, the amended statutory provision, as recommended by the review group, would include a power vested in the court to direct that the statement as delivered or any part of it would not be published or broadcast without prejudice to any other power of the court, something with which we all agree. The review group said it would seem to be a sensitive way to deal with any such problems which would suffice in the vast majority of cases where any issue might arise. The relevant provisions in the Bill, as published, are sections 5 and 6 and the explanatory memorandum tell us section 5 of the Bill amends the 1993 Act by inserting a new section, section 5(a), the purpose of which is to allow a child, a person with a mental disorder or any other person, with the leave of the court, to make a victim impact statement by means of a live television link, thereby removing the requirement that the person be present in court. Section 6 goes further and its purpose is to make provision for any questioning of a child or a person with a mental disorder regarding his or her victim impact statement to be done via an intermediary. The explanatory memorandum states the court may appoint an intermediary where the age or mental condition of the child or person is such. I do not recall it was ever the intention of the victim impact statement process to allow for cross-examination by counsel of surviving members of a family, let alone the cross-examination of children or persons with a mental disorder. I may be alone in this but I cannot believe that most people would believe, as happened in the recent Lillis case in the Central Court, that a case should end with a victim impact statement from the child of the family concerned being subjected to cross-examination by counsel or intermediaries in a public forum. I cannot believe there is public demand for the cross-examination of children or persons with mental disorders in the witness box in a case where one parent has killed the other. On the one hand, one can argue that it is important that justice be administered in public. Thus, a statement from a child should be read out and be subject to cross-examination. On the other hand, the potential for the cross-examination of a family member, never mind a cross- examination of a child or a person with a mental disorder, on his or her victim impact seems to me to be prurient and not to serve any public interest Is it the case that a statutory law 60 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage reform measure which used to be about victim impact statements and how they should be received prior to sentencing has now become a measure to receive additional evidence that serves only a public appetite and has nothing to do with the sentencing process? We must consider, perhaps not in regard to this Bill but to the discussion we have had and the points raised by Deputy Flanagan, whether new law is always the answer to our problems in the criminal justice system. No matter how many new laws we enact the question of enforcement arises. In the criminal area the question arises of detections and convictions, which are falling. We are not having and have not had any debate in this House — although we should — on the most recent report from the Garda Síochána inspectorate. I raised the matter with the Minister by way of a parliamentary question recently but he was not having one of his better days and I got no answer. However, he is a very affable fellow in private——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Correct.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: ——and I know he will eventually come around to talking about it but some very serious issues were raised in that report. Obviously, the Minister is the sort who puts on the green jersey and says: “I am the Minister for Justice, my job is to defend the Garda Síochána and is it not terrible what they are saying on the other side of the House?” What we are saying on this side of the House is intended to assist the Garda Síochána and the very many thousands of people in the force who want to do their job in accordance with modern management practice and best practice in general. The 25 or 27 recommendations in that report are very worrying. In the land of the Celtic tiger, I do not know how we reached the year 2010 when the assistant chief of the association of garda sergeants and inspectors can say on the radio that most Garda stations in Ireland do not have e-mail. It is little wonder that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. I do not know what action the Minister is taking on that report. He was preceded by similarly stellar personalities, including the former Minister, Michael McDowell, and the present Mini- ster for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan. Over all those years the chant was “Garda reform”. Then along came the woman from Boston who put together a report on the actuality on the ground. One wonders then about all that huffing and puffing. Does the Minister remember the whirlwind the former Minister, Mr. McDowell, created about the Garda reserve force? One is left with the conclusion that it was a smokescreen, meant to divert from more fundamental issues. I know the Minister would not engage in anything like that but he must ask the Govern- ment Whip to provide time in this House so that we can debate that report and hear the Minister’s assessment and that of his officials in regard to it. We could be passing law in this Chamber until the cows come home but if it is ignored, not invoked or not implemented, for whatever reason, whether through lack of resources or modern management techniques, inadequate technology or other resources necessary for the Garda Síochána not being provided, then we are wasting our time in making new laws and adding to those that are not being implemented. I broadly welcome the Bill the Minister introduced to the House today. My colleague in the other House, Senator Bacik, raised some points I would like to tease out with the Minister on Committee Stage. For example, and to give the Minister notice, she raised the question of the court to which application is to be made being the Court of Criminal Appeal. She said that was not envisaged by the review group which made various criticisms of the manner in which the jurisdiction of the Court of Criminal Appeal has developed. The group specifically recommended that greater rationality — its term — be brought to bear on the piecemeal — its term — development of the jurisdiction of that court. The review group was of the view that it would be appropriate for appeals againSt acquittals 61 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.] to be brought to the Supreme Court. In regard to double jeopardy the group recommended that the prosecution right could be exercised if the Supreme Court so decided. In other words, it recommends that this should be a matter for the Supreme Court rather than for the Court of Criminal Appeal. Senator Bacik also raised concerns about certain provisions of the Bill, namely, whether its restrictions are adequate. She said, for example, that under section 16 the District Court may approve the arrest and detention of an acquitted person in respect of whom no retrial order has yet been made. In other words, the Garda can seek right of re-arrest from the District Court before an acquittal has been set aside and a retrial ordered. As a constitutional lawyer, she said she is not convinced that would necessarily be constitutional. As the Senator suggested, I suppose there is always the danger of flight. It may be considered overall in the interests of justice and the public interest that the procedure as envisaged in the Bill should go ahead. However, I would like to hear the Minister address that point. Is he satisfied that it is compliant with the Constitution? I refer the Minister to the submission which I am sure he has received on this matter from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. I do not want to see a pained expression come over the Minister’s face because, believe it or not, broadly that body is in agreement with him. That is a day he should celebrate and be happy.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I should. It shows how much attention I pay to it.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: It does. I agree with the Minister. The ICCL makes the point it does not consider that the proposed amendment of criminal procedure rules will result in any significant changes for the victims of crime. The central and unique selling point of this Bill is that it is about making significant changes for the victims of crime. Referring to the document it published some years ago, “Better Deal”, the council refers to the fact that the majority of crime victims do not see rules of evidence and criminal procedure as an effective means through which to vindicate their rights. They wish, rather, to see real practical changes in their treatment within the criminal justice system. Amendments to the regime surrounding the use of victim impact statements are a welcome development. However, the victims of crime should be placed centre stage in any reform of the law and the Bill currently fails in that regard. For example, the Bill does not identify the personnel who will guide victims through the victim impact procedures, whether these be the Garda, the judge, the Courts Service or any others. To some extent that pours a bucket of cold water over the proposition that this Bill is a giant leap forward for victims. It is a modest reform which I welcome but the matters referred to in what was a seminal document, published some years ago by the ICCL, are still worthy of attention as is the possibility of amending this Bill to provide for some of the tangible changes that body sought.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on this legislation. We are all ad idem with regard to the need for respect for the law, for its integrity and for its strict enforcement. We agree in particular that we must ensure the law warrants respect and has an integrity for which the public has regard. I am the only Member here at present with no qualification in this area, but I read up on it from time to time. We live and learn. An issue that has come to our attention in recent times is the situation with regard to victims. Victims, and the relatives of victims when the victim is no longer alive, are in a precarious situation because a life that is lost cannot be replaced. There can be no redress for that loss. There has been criticism of some victim impact statements in the past because people wonder why the statement is made when it can do no good at that stage. We must recognise that the 62 Criminal Procedure Bill 2009 : 11 February 2010. Second Stage family of the victim — mother, father, wife, husband or whatever — looks at the issue from a different viewpoint. While it may be all very well to be able to say a decision has been made on what technically and legally happened and the perpetrator has been sentenced to five years imprisonment or whatever, the victim’s family and the victim, if he or she is still around, see things quite differently. We must recognise this. We should all think about how we would feel if we were in that type of situation and whether we would have absolute regard for the niceties of the law when phrasing what we had to say. I believe some of the statements that have been issued have been issued with great restraint, even though there has been criticism of them. I hope the Minister will keep this in mind. It is generally recognised that a clever defence and careful thought in the preparation of a case can lead to a perpetrator getting a lighter sentence than might be the case in different circumstances. This must be borne in mind. It should never become possible for somebody to commit an atrocity, whether serious injury, assault, a killing or any such crime, and be able to walk away from the situation or attempt to get away with it on technical grounds. Such cases provide no relief for unfortunate victims. No matter on what technical grounds a case is dismissed, the fact remains that the offence took place. What respect is demonstrated for the law in such a situation? There has been absolute contempt for the law in this country for some considerable time. The greater and more serious the breach of the law and the more serious the offence againSt the person, the State or whoever, the greater the possibility of the perpetrator getting away with it. Some perpetrators have established almost iconic status for themselves due to the manner in which they have managed to evade justice. I and others on this side of the House cannot understand how the area of organised criminal activity goes unchallenged. This activity continues even as we speak. Some criminals have established a kind of celebrity status due to the degree to which they have managed to intimi- date the system, the community and ordinary people and get away with it. This cannot be allowed to continue. The Minister has introduced restrictive legislation, which I support, to tackle these issues, but nothing seems to have happened as a result. We discovered last week that some sections of a Bill have not been enforced at all. I expected serious criminals would be put behind bars and we would see the effect of the legislation within three or four months. What are we waiting for and why are we waiting? The information is available and the criminals are known to the Garda. I am sure gardaí have the information piled up. What is the reason for the delay? Are we waiting to process passports for them to enable them to leave the State rather than get caught? If we were to ask ordinary people about this, we would be made aware they have become very cynical about this kind of thing. They are asking us what is the reason for the delay in enforcing the legislation. Is it because, for some unknown reason, the State does not want to catch these people and does not want the trouble of that? Is it because it believes that if they keep shooting each other, there will be none of them left? This was the attitude in Chicago in the 1930s, but it did not work. The lack of enforcement is an appalling indictment of our system. Worst of all, it is an appalling threat to ordinary law-abiding citizens. Generally I am aware of the intention of the Minister with regard to issues, but I do not know what the Minister has in mind on this subject. Sometimes I think he is bored by it or other times I think he feels he cannot do anything about the situation. Perhaps that is true. Sometimes I think the Minister feels the Opposition is a pain, and perhaps it is.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I would never think that, particularly of the Deputy.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I have got his focus now and I thank him for that. I am not making personal criticisms, but I remind the Minister that it is on his watch that criminal activity is getting out of hand and a new generation is being trained, a generation that is growing up with contempt for the law and who is becoming more innovative in that regard. It 63 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.] has new ideas and is getting better at avoiding justice. Unless some action is taken soon to give some indication to the organised criminal gangs roaming this land that they cannot continue as they are, the price we will pay will be more serious than anything we have paid so far. One day, as has happened before, we will wake up to some major atrocity, the like of which we have not seen before, and action will be taken then when it will be too late. I do not purport to try to tell the Minister how to do his job, but that is the advice I would give him with regard to criminal activity. I know the Minister is aware of the issues, but I wonder when some action will be taken. I hope that the passage of this legislation will lead to action. We have had more legislation in this area in the past number of years than ever before in the history of the State. We have had one Bill after the other to combat one crisis after the other. However, nothing has been achieved as a result. The strange thing is that most of the issues that were raised could have been handled without the new legislation because there was already adequate legislation in existence. I will never understand why we cannot see some action taken that will make a serious impact on the situation and restore public confidence in the institutions of the State and the ability of those institutions to deal with whatever happens, particularly with criminal activity as we experience it now. One lesson that must be learned is that all the legislation in the world will not replace enforcement. The enactment means nothing unless it is enforced fully. Unfortunately, much of the legislation passed in this House in recent years is not enforced and nobody has any regard for it. As a result, the whole situation is problematic.

Debate adjourned.

Ceisteanna — Questions.

Priority Questions.

————

Hospital Services.

1. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she will take to tackle the number of patients waiting on trolleys in accident and emergency, which was recorded by a union (details supplied) at a high of 500 during January 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7227/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): A number of emergency departments have been recording high numbers of patients waiting to be admitted to hospital in recent weeks. However, detailed sampling from 24 hospitals, which began in February last year, to the end of December indicate that 87% of all patients attending an emergency department were either discharged or admitted within the maximum target of six hours, and 94% of all patients who did not require an admission were discharged within this time. I do not believe that the “trolley count” figures for patients awaiting admission are an adequate indicator of performance in emergency departments as they only record the waiting time from when a decision has been taken to admit. From the end of March, the HSE will record waiting time from when a patient arrives in the emergency department. This will be a far more meaningful record of patients’ experience in emergency departments. I have been monitoring the situation in emergency departments very closely. I met with the chairperson, CEO and members of the HSE management team recently to review progress and to ensure that all possible steps are being taken to minimise the waiting time for patients 64 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions awaiting admission. I asked the HSE to streamline the administrative processes for dealing with applications under the fair deal so that the discharge of patients to a suitable long-stay facility is not delayed unnecessarily. The HSE has put several actions in train including escalation plans to enable patients to be moved to wards, additional ward rounds to take place daily to help earlier discharges from hospitals and ensuring access to additional diagnostic facilities such as imaging to allow earlier decisions about admission or discharge. At my request, the HSE is also putting in place a system of early warning measures so that corrective action is taken as soon as problems in a particular hospital are identified. Hospitals have also been instructed to ensure that all escalation measures are implemented and reviewed as necessary and that appropriate liaison arrangements with primary and community services are in place.

Deputy James Reilly: I thank the Minister for her response. I welcome the fact that, not before time, the waiting time will be counted from the time the patient attends the accident and emergency department. To be frank, it is nonsensical to have any other system. The reality is that during January the figure reached 500 people on trolleys. It is a number of years since the Minister declared that this would be treated as a national emergency. It is not a blip. Last week, the Minister said on “The Pat Kenny Show” that it was a blip and that there will always be people on trolleys in every health care system and every hospital in the world. I have to disagree. I stood in a busy hospital in Holland where there were no patients in the corridors and no patients on trolleys in accident and emergency. Patients were seen within ten minutes of coming into the hospital, and admitted and discharged within a couple of hours. That is what we should have and there is no reason that we should not have it. This is reality for people. I have an e-mail from a constituent——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: A question, please.

Deputy James Reilly: I will ask a question. I want to ask about this constituent, whose father is aged 85 and lay on a trolley from Sunday night until last night. He has now been moved to a bed but he is still in an annex to accident and emergency in Beaumont Hospital. The recent contention of Professor Brendan Drumm that 30% of patients, because they are only in hospital for 48 hours, do not really need to be there is utter rubbish. I have spoken to my colleagues about this. There is not a single patient admitted into Beaumont, the Mater, the James Connolly or any of the other hospitals who does not need to be admitted. Does the Minister accept she has failed to solve the accident and emergency crisis, that the plans she has put in place have been a dismal failure and that a new approach is required?

Deputy Mary Harney: First, I do not accept that everybody who is admitted to a hospital should be there. We know from the bed utilisation study that a large percentage of patients should not have been in hospital in the first place. As Professor Drumm said at the committee the other day, many people are admitted in order to get access to diagnostics. Not only is that an issue for the public health system, it is also an issue for insurers. I am engaging with private insurers to make sure we do not support bad practice, which is that we financially support inpatient activity when it is not necessary. We know a large percentage of patients who enter from accident and emergency are admitted when senior decision makers may not be available to deal with their issue. I spoke to a consultant friend recently who told me that when he was working in accident and emergency one weekend, he was able to discharge a large number of patients who were down for admission and refer them to his clinic the following week. That is an issue. The new consultant contract, 65 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.] with clinical directors and the huge new powers we have given, including nurse prescribing, will lead to a more immediate response. Second, I am not aware of any hospital in the world, and I have visited some of the best, where there are not trolleys in accident and emergency.

Deputy James Reilly: The Minister should visit Holland.

Deputy Mary Harney: I had an experience in an accident and emergency department in County Waterford a number of years ago, where I was on a trolley while tests were done. I am not aware of a hospital anywhere in the world where trolleys are not used if the staff are doing blood tests or other tests. The issue is how long people are waiting before they are either discharged or admitted. A number of years ago, we did not measure that. The issue is not whether it is 200, 300 or 500 patients; it is how long any individual patient is waiting. Last year, only 40% of patients who were being admitted were admitted within the six hours. This has now increased to 52%. I accept there are still 48% who are not admitted in that six-hour period, which is unsatisfactory. However, we never measured againSt a six-hour target until recently and, from the end of March of this year, hospitals will have to measure from the time patients arrive. If somebody was waiting six days, I would like to get the details of the individual case. That is totally unsatisfactory. If the Deputy would give me the details, I would like to pursue the matter.

Deputy James Reilly: I did not refer to six days today but I will get the Minister the information, which relates to another person.

Deputy Mary Harney: I thought the Deputy referred to six days. Perhaps it was three days.

Deputy James Reilly: We all get disorientated in here. It happens to the best of us. With regard to the Minister’s semantics about somebody lying on a trolley, we all know what we mean by trolleys in accident and emergency and the length of time people have to wait. There is no question about that. What the Minister describes is something that will happen into the future. The reality is that people are lying on trolleys now, and they were there yesterday, the day before, last week and last year because they do not have access to the diagnostics to which the Minister referred because they are not being provided. There is no point talking about utopia and how things will change until those measures are put in place. Professor Drumm and the Minister gave a great performance at the committee earlier in the week about all the things that will be done. Until they are done and until we see the primary care rolled out, we have a real problem. The bottom line remains that the Minister must accept responsibility. For the past three years, despite announcing her plan, despite the money that was spent on it and despite saying this would be treated as a national emergency, it has not happened. After three years, the public do not believe it will happen under the Minster’s jurisdiction.

Deputy Mary Harney: I have a lovely graph which I will send across to the Deputy. I do not want to hold it up in the Chamber and be accused of using a banner. The graph shows performance in 2005 as againSt now. By any yardstick, there have been considerable improvements. While I am by no means saying the situation is ideal, there have been steady improvements. I genuinely believe the clinical directorate model which is now in place is making a huge difference. I also strongly support the escalation policies. I have been reading material from 66 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions other countries, even since the committee meeting earlier in the week, which confirms what the chief medical officer said. The fact is that when there is an issue in an emergency department, it is not just an issue for the emergency department but for the entire hospital. The entire hospital must deal with it seriously, as happens in many hospitals throughout the country — Waterford hospital has a very good track record in this regard, as does Kilkenny hospital and many other hospitals. There are hospitals, particularly in the greater Dublin area, that currently have issues around late discharges, and the introduction of the new scheme has caused initial delays because it is very new and must be signed off on legally and in some cases by the courts. However, when those 7,000 applications are processed, this will have a huge impact on late discharges.

Health Services.

2. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to ensure that the cut in the operational budget of the Health Service Executive for 2010 does not result in overcrowded accident and emergency departments, longer waiting times for operations, diagnostic procedures, reduction in essential community supports and other negative outcomes for patients; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7126/10]

4. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on whether reducing in-patient procedures by between 46,000 and 54,000 in 2010 means that patients will have to wait longer for essential diagnostics and treatment and will result in increased pressure on accident and emergency departments; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6905/10] Deputy Mary Harney: I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 4 together. The HSE National Service Plan 2010, which I approved on 5 February, commits the HSE to delivering activity levels for 2010 which are broadly in line with 2009 levels. The plan was laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas on 8 February and has been published on the HSE’s website. During 2010, the HSE will provide me with monthly performance reports on all aspects of progression of the plan. As part of the Estimates process, the Government made a series of decisions that will reduce HSE costs by approximately €1 billion in 2010, comprising savings of €630 million on pay and almost €400 million in non-pay. However, it also made available additional resources to assist the HSE in responding to priority demographic and other needs and to support ongoing reform of the public health services. Planned activity levels for primary community and continuing care services in 2010 are in line with 2009, with some growth in activity proposed in areas such as fair deal, home care packages and medical cards schemes. In respect of acute hospital services, the plan targets a reduction of 54,000 in-patient cases through a combination of reducing emergency admissions by more than 33,000 and providing access to diagnostics on a non-inpatient basis to at least 10,000 patients who would otherwise be admitted only for that purpose. It also targets a further increase in day case activity to 689,000 which is in line with the trend during the last decade whereby the number of day cases carried out in the public hospital system increased from 273,000 in 2000 to an estimated 679,000 in 2009. The national service plan commits the HSE to specific and demanding targets for improvement in average length of stay, the proportion of a specified basket of procedures to be undertaken on a day surgery basis and day of surgery admission. These targets have been informed 67 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.] by international evidence and data indicating that within the Irish health service there is an appreciable variation in performance as between different hospitals for similar procedures. The Executive will therefore focus on reducing this variance in performance as well as on protecting in-patient beds for elective surgery in order to reduce waiting times. I recognise that meeting these targets will require co-ordinated and sustained effort, involving clinicians, management and other professional and support staff. However, the changes required are driven not only by efficiency considerations but by evidence that they deliver other benefits in terms of patient safety, a more user-friendly service delivery and better patient outcomes. Achievement of the performance targets in relation to emergency admissions will require increased access to the specialist skills and senior clinical decision-making available in medical assessment units, to diagnostics and to other ambulatory care services. Accordingly, under the national service plan the acute sector will continue to manage emergency admissions while at the same time achieving elective activity targets. By reforming the manner in which services are provided, I am confident the HSE will deliver the volumes of service provided for in the plan, while at the same time continuing to improve service quality and patient outcomes.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: It is a scandal that almost half the number of patients admitted to hospital through the accident and emergency department are not admitted within six hours. What changes or improvements in this regard will take place in the coming year? Will the Minister confirm that 1,100 acute hospital beds are to be closed this year owing to the cuts proposed in the service plan? If that is the case, how is the Health Service Executive to reach its targets in terms of reducing the number of people on trolleys in accident and emergency departments and in regard to reducing the waiting times for people to be admitted to hospital? How can the Minister square that circle? It seems to me to be impossible. The cuts are right across the board. How are more people to be treated in the community if the community is also suffering cuts and the effects of the moratorium? The Minister stated she will address the fact that the fair deal scheme is causing people to remain in hospital unnecessarily. That people cannot leave hospital owing to the situation in regard to medical assessments is a serious problem. The Minister spoke about this issue in a general way. What specifically does she intend to do in regard to the conditions of the fair deal scheme, in particular the financial assessments which are the core of the problem? For example, will people be permitted to leave hospital before their assessment has been completed? What specific measures does the Minister have in mind?

Deputy Mary Harney: A later reply to a question dealing with the industrial relations environment may deal with some of the issues raised by the Deputy. As regards the Deputy’s request to brief her party on the fair deal scheme, I am happy to do so. I would be happy to provide same for the Fine Gael party. On fair deal, a completely new legal system has been introduced. In many cases we are dealing with people of diminished ability and issues in respect of family residence require court approval and so on. There is a time lag in respect of the backlog. The majority of the 7,000 applications to which I referred are in respect of people already in care or in the acute hospital system. A backlog was inevitable given the new scheme came into operation only in November. We all anticipated such a backlog. I am satisfied that when those decisions are made, many of which will not require court approval and some of which have been already approved, people will be able to move rapidly to appropriate care. Many of the people who have made appli- 68 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions cations are people already in care and who are opting for this system as opposed to the subvention system. Others may not have received any support. On the closure of beds, the plan contains no proposal to close X or Y number of beds. The plan is to move from in-patient to day care. Best practise is that 80% of surgery should be done on a day case basis. We have quite a bit to go to reach that target. We must also reach the target in respect of same day admission, even where overnight is required. Among the initiatives currently underway with the appointment of Dr. Barry White as clinical director is the ringfencing of beds for surgical or elective activity, having new care pathways led by specialist clinicians around the country so that there is less emphasis on people having to go into hospital, in particular for those with chronic illnesses such as diabetes, respiratory and other conditions, and a greater emphasis on providing that service on a non-hospital basis.

Deputy James Reilly: The plan is seeking a reduction of 33,313 emergency admissions and a reduction of 54,000 in-patient procedures, all of which is to be compensated by a small increase of 10,569. The arithmetic does not work out. When one compares the figures for planned in-patient surgery for January 2010 in respect of people waiting in pain to have gallstones removed, to have hernias repaired or for knee or hip replacements with the figures for 2007, 2008 or 2009, the reduction has been huge. I spoke today with a Dublin surgeon who told me all surgeons are experiencing a reduction from eight to one cases per day owing to the unavailability of beds. This plan will further reduce the number of beds available. While the Minister did not mention a figure, the one being bandied about in terms of bed closures this year is 1,100. There is no question but that this will impact negatively on patients. The Minister must know how many beds are to be closed. I am sure she can confirm whether the correct number is 1,100, which is the figure being bandied about. When will the Minister focus on sorting out hospital inefficiencies rather than on cutting services and closing beds?

Deputy Mary Harney: The Deputy will be aware that the manner in which hospitals and clinicians are now assessed is across performance indicators. The key performance indicators are available on a monthly basis and make for very interesting reading. There is a huge variation, even in emergency departments, between the number of patients seen per medic or nurse in one part of the country as compared with another and between hospitals. There is also a variation in costs, which I accept is in some instances related to the acuity of what is being dealt with. One must compare like with like. If one compares ratios of patients to doctors or nurses, there is a huge variation across the country. Now that we have performance indicators we are able to access this information. What one does not measure one cannot manage. We did not have these indicators before nor did we have appropriate waiting times in emergency departments. Three years ago we were only measuring people waiting 24 hours for treatment. We recently commenced measuring those waiting 12 hours for treatment and more recently six hours. From the end of March all hospitals will be required to measure not alone patients waiting six hours for treatment but the length of time of treatment from when they arrive at the door which, rather than the time the decision is made by the clinician to admit the person, is the issue. All of these steps are being taken with a view to improving and driving efficiency. On beds, we often become obsessed with numbers.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: The Minister would too if she were left waiting on a trolley for hours.

Deputy Mary Harney: Yes. What is important is that the patient is treated. If it is appropriate for treatment to be provided on a non-hospital basis in a primary care setting, day case basis, 69 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.] same day surgery and so on, that is where it should be given. The issue for surgeons, which is being addressed by Dr. White, is the ringfencing of beds. Many surgeons say that they do bring in their patients in advance to ensure they have a bed. That has been part of the problem, but it is being addressed at the moment. Those clinical leads will be in place on a interim basis in March and will be appointed on a permanent basis later.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: In the context of the 48% who are not admitted within six hours, it may well be, as the Minister said, that there are people on trolleys in A&E departments around the world. However there is a big difference between being on a trolley in a cubicle in an A& E unit, and being on a trolley out in a public space in the way of nurses who are trying to do their work. There is, for example, no privacy if an elderly man or woman has to use a bed-pan. Let us look at the situation honestly. If one is in a crowded A&E unit with nowhere to go for six hours or more, surely that is very different from the rosy picture the Minister paints of people waiting on trolleys in A&E units around the world. They may do so and it is fine if they are in a cubicle. There are a certain number of cubicles in our A&E departments, but we are concerned about those who are out in public spaces literally blocking corridors. I wish the Minister would realise the seriousness of this problem for people who have to endure it.

Deputy James Reilly: I do not want to get into semantics with the Minister but I hope we are measuring the number of people in A&E, rather than measuring people. The bottom line is that there have been serious delays in surgeries and people are being left in pain needlessly. Another issue is now arising. Given the Department’s focus on breast cancer, people who are being screened for suspected cancer are being brought in a bumped up the list ahead of men and women who have proven bowel, bone or lung cancer. This is having a deleterious effect on people with cancer. They require operations, yet they are being bumped down the list to ensure the figures stack up, so I am told, for the breast cancer scheme. There is a lot of shifting around here, so I would like the Minister to address that issue. There is no doubt that hospitals are unable to cope, and this is particularly so in those serving north Dublin, including Beaumont, the Mater, James Connolly and Drogheda. Some 61 people were on trolleys the other day in Beaumont Hospital. People are waiting 72 hours for treatment and this is not anecdotal, it is happening daily. People are contacting me by e-mail and telephone to ask what the Minister is going to do about this. The Minister could simply put out to tender services for physiotherapy, speech, language and occupational therapy, which are associated with existing nursing beds in the community, thus moving people out of hospitals. If they are not moved soon after their acute phase of treatment, they do not get rehab and are left there for four or five months, the opportunity is missed and thus they will end up in long-term care and will never get home. Will the Minister consider that?

Deputy Mary Harney: Yes. We are providing additional beds. I am in dispute with some of the Deputies from Kerry because we are providing more rehab beds as opposed to long-stay facilities, such as those in Tralee. That is because that is the requirement and that is what is advised.

Deputy James Reilly: I am concerned with Dublin where the problem is acute.

Deputy Mary Harney: I am concerned with patients everywhere. As regards the issue of treating patients in hospital, many people end up in accident and emergency departments who do not require such treatment. When the Deputy and I were growing up in this city, an emergency department was for a genuine emergency. Unfortunately, because of some of the issues 70 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions he has raised, people have ended up in accident and emergency departments as a route to access acute hospital services or because they need diagnostics.

Deputy James Reilly: Very few.

Deputy Mary Harney: In some cases it was the only way of accessing those diagnostics. I accept what Deputy Jan O’Sullivan says about having people in unsuitable facilities, particularly in some of the older A&E units that have poor facilities. That is why we strongly support the escalation policies, as the A&E consultants do. I have been reading about great hospitals all over the world, including Stony Brook Hospital in New York which is regarded as one of the best hospitals there. It has a full capacity protocol policy and that is exactly what they do when they have an issue in their A&E department. I saw it for myself in Vancouver when I was there. That is the policy we want to implement here, although there is resistance to it, particularly in the Deputy’s own area. That is the kind of approach that has delivered success elsewhere, rather than having large numbers of people in A&E.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: Does the Minister mean to move people into crowded wards instead of crowded A&Es?

Deputy Mary Harney: I want to give the Deputy the evidence, which she should examine. I know she is a person who genuinely looks at the facts.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I have been in Vancouver General Hospital and it is a hell of a lot more spacious than Limerick Regional.

Deputy Mary Harney: The A&E consultants themselves support it and I know this is on the agenda of the A&E forum. We thought we were close to agreement there, but there are still outstanding issues. The Deputy’s own A&E consultant, Dr. O’Donnell in Limerick, who is regarded as one of the best — he is a terrific doctor with great leadership skills — has been a strong advocate of this policy for quite some time. He said this is better and safer care, and I accept that.

Deputy James Reilly: It is not safe care though. That is the point.

Deputy Mary Harney: Yes, it is better and safer.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: There is not enough space in the wards.

Health Staff Work to Rule.

3. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children if the work to rule by staff and the refusal by unions to cooperate in certain work practices and to cooperate in the transfer of staff has resulted in an impairment of patient care or services; if she will give assurances that no diminution of services to patients will occur as a result of the work to rule; the measures she has taken to avoid an impairment of patient services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7228/10] Deputy Mary Harney: The industrial action which is underway across the public service has the potential to cause serious disruption in the health sector depending on its scope and scale. My main concern is to ensure that the effect of the dispute on patient care is minimised as much as possible and, so far, this has been achieved. The HSE and my Department are monitoring the evolving situation daily in close co-operation with the Department of Finance, which has responsibility for the public service. Where 71 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.] issues that could impact on patient care have arisen, it has so far been possible to resolve the situation at local level. I want to acknowledge the responsible approach which has been taken to date in this regard by the relevant health service unions. There is no doubt that, following a period of rapid increase in funding, the health services are now facing the challenge of managing with much tighter financial resources. There is scope within the health system, by reforming the way services are delivered, to achieve more through greater efficiency and concentrating on services that contribute most to people’s health and well-being. There is an onus on all concerned — Government, management, trade unions and employees — to find a way of engaging on the reforms which are needed to deliver better services to patients.

Deputy James Reilly: I know the HSE has expressed serious concern about the impact of this industrial action. According to reports, staff are not checking patients’ daily treatment appointments. In addition they are not answering phones or agreeing to the redeployment of staff and the change in working hours currently in place, and are not providing weekend on- call arrangements. This is having an extremely negative effect on patients. It is particularly difficult and stressful for those who are terminally ill. They may wish to attend a hospice and have the additional stress of not being able to get anyone to answer a phone for an appointment. They are consequently unsure wherever or not they can obtain such an appointment. The problem also extends to the wider area of making repeat appointments because may wish to check appointment details but cannot get through by phone. We will not digress into the argument about the centralisation of medical cards but it is similar. If people cannot get through they become frustrated, worried and concerned. What action is the Minister taking to guarantee the House that there will be no diminution of services and that this action can be addressed? What action is she taking to prevent the situation from escalating? I believe it is due to escalate from 1 March.

Deputy Mary Harney: I acknowledge that where issues arose that may have directly affected patient care, responsible action was taken by unions at local level. For example, there was an issue concerning radiotherapy in Cork and I acknowledge that was resolved without patients being affected. I salute that. Clearly, however, everyone who works in the health service has an impact on patient services, including clerical staff who make appointments, process applications and respond to queries. I would like to think that the current difficulties in the industrial relations environment could come to an end quickly. They are not exclusive to the health area, they are across the public service. I understand how public servants feel about the reduction in their income because of the financial situation we find ourselves in. 4oBefore’clock the budget we had exciting discussions with the health unions concerning reforms in the health area, including longer working days, redeployment and flexibility. They were all the things we need to provide a better service to patients within the resources we can make available. As we move the more acute services from one hospital to another, we must be able to redeploy staff, otherwise it will not work as effectively as we anticipate. I cannot tell the Deputy when the current difficulties will pass but it is the Government’s wish, as the Taoiseach said earlier this week, to engage with the public sector unions as quickly as possible on the reform agenda so that no further reductions in pay might be necessary in 2011 and 2012.

Deputy James Reilly: I thank the Minister for her reply but pay is not the issue, patient care is. I hope the Minister will be able to use her good offices to engage with the unions and ensure that patient care is not compromised. She should not allow the situation to escalate as is clearly planned in March. I hope she will be able to give us some indication of what her plans are to 72 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions deal with that. Some plans must be put in place to deal with any escalation, although we have not heard what they are.

Deputy Mary Harney: I accept the Deputy’s positive comments in his response to that matter. While the Deputy may say pay is not the issue, at the heart of the dispute is the reduction in public sector pay. I would hope that we can return to the reform agenda with the public sector unions. We have had very responsible engagement with them in the past and I have no doubt that the people who work in the health service are well motivated by patient concerns, want to do the best for their patients and would want to see the kinds of reforms I mentioned earlier implemented as soon as possible. If we can return to dialogue — hopefully that can happen soon — I hope we would be in a position to have that positive agenda agreed.

Deputy James Reilly: Is there a provisional plan?

Deputy Mary Harney: In fairness with regard to a plan, it is not possible to have a big strategy and decide this is how we will do it. We need to deal with the individuals at a local level in the main.

Deputy James Reilly: Is there any strategy?

Deputy Mary Harney: We are doing that. There is a plan. It is reviewed every day. The Department of Finance is the co-ordinating Department. In the health area not a day goes by without the official in my Department who is dedicated to the matter being involved with the HSE at a central and local level regarding the different issues that arise.

Question No. 4 answered with Question No. 2.

Services for People with Disabilities.

5. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she will take to ensure the Health Service Executive engages in discussions with an organisation (details supplied) to provide the estimated €1,970,000 per annum additional financing required to enable the expansion of its home care services for severely disabled children to children under the age of six years; her views on the fact that such an extension of services offers significant cost reductions to the State and also the uniform delivery of better services for severely disabled children and their parents; her further views on the conclusions of the report entitled, There’s No Place Like Home — A Cost and Outcomes Analysis of Alternative Models of Care for Young Children with Severe Disabilities in Ireland, published on 3 February 2010. [7125/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): The HSE provided funding of €585,000 to the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation in 2009 and will be happy to consider the report “There’s no Place like Home” as part of its engagement with the foundation this year. Neither my Department nor the HSE was involved in the preparation of this report. I agree that, in general, children’s needs are most appropriately met and provided in the home, and that we need to ensure more efficient use of resources. However, many children availing of services provided by the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation also avail of other disability services and the report did not compare the respective costs of the home-based care provided by the foundation to the cost of similar services provided by the HSE. The current economic and budgetary position means we can only continue to fund new services by reducing costs and greater efficiency, including achieving greater integration of services provided by the statutory and non-statutory sectors. I should mention in this context that my Department is undertaking a review of the efficiency and effectiveness of the health 73 Priority 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy John Moloney.] and personal services provided to people with disabilities. This review is part of the Govern- ment’s value for money and policy review programme. The review will focus, in particular, on the scope for achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness from the substantial resources expended on services for people with disabilities and will support the future planning and development of such services. I can assure the Deputy that the issues raised in the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation report will be considered as part of that review.

Deputy Alan Shatter: Will the Minister of State acknowledge that it was not possible for the report to consider any home-care services provided by the HSE and the costing of those services with the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation services because the information is simply not available? There is a lack of uniformity across the country in the services available for severely intellectually disabled children. Would the Minister of State agree that the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation catering for 1,200 families with severe intellectual disability since 1997 has done extraordinary work? Would he accept that in the context of the provision of care for such children the annual average cost to deliver acute hospital care for a severely disabled child is €147,365 compared to the average cost of €16,427 per annum for the child to have home care by the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation? Would the Minister of State acknowledge that it is desirable that the services provided by Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation be extended to children between the ages of four and six as many of the State and HSE-provided services do not kick in until a child is six? It would require an additional grant of €1,970,000 per annum to the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation to ensure that a universal service is available to all families with a severely disabled child so that the child could be provided with home care uniformly across the country. Would the Minister of State not merely encourage, but specifically ask the person in charge of these services in the HSE — it is not always clear who that is — to sit down with representatives of the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation to work out how to most efficiently and cost-effectively provide the essential services needed for all children under six with severe intellectual disability?

Deputy John Moloney: The Deputy has asked a number of questions. There is no dispute over the figure of €143,000 as compared to the cost of care provided by the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation. I acknowledge the value of care provided by the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation. I dispute the Deputy’s contention about availability of comparative information. That information is available. Naturally, when we consider the €1.6 billion that is now provided to support people with disabilities, that is the main frame for the review. I do not want to use the review in the context of a money saving exercise — it is far from that. It is an attempt to ensure that the €1.6 billion that is being provided provides the maximum level of care. The review is not all about value for money or savings. It is also about policy. It is very important in the context of what the Deputy just said and in particular by the way of the services being provided by the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation that we also look at the proposal by way of direct payment to families and clearly this is part of the policy review. I must accept the point the Deputy makes that in comparison to the cost to the State of the care provided by the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation, the jury is certainly in on that one — the value is far greater. The review proposals are not long term — they will be with the Department by June. In the meantime, I intend, with the departmental officials, to meet not just representatives of the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation, but also many other providers to ensure they are involved in the review. 74 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

Deputy Alan Shatter: I very much welcome that the Minister of State will meet representatives of the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation. That would be a major step forward. I understand that while the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation on occasions works in co-operation with different sections in the HSE, its representatives have found it impossible to identify a person in charge who will sit down and talk to them about the national service it provides. I ask the Minister of State to communicate with me as to who they should contact in that regard and to encourage the HSE to engage in such discussions. Does the Minister of State have the figure for the cost being incurred on an annualised basis by the HSE service to assist the parents of severely intellectually disabled children who are providing home care to them? I ask him to make the comparator public. What is needed is a coherent uniform service delivered by the most cost effective and well staffed service provider. The Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation has an extraordinary imprimatur from all families to whom it provides assistance. I ask the Minister of State to consider a policy direction to the HSE to provide this service through the Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation and to extend it to children aged between four and six.

Deputy John Moloney: I take precisely the advice the Deputy is giving. I have already initiated those policy decisions under a number of headings. I have no difficulty meeting the HSE and providing publicly the comparator figures. I insisted that two people from the disability sector — one from the intellectual disability sector and one from the physical disability sector — should be on the review committee examining the funding for disabilities to ensure that everything the Deputy is saying would be put in place. I agree with the Deputy that probably owing to the changeover from the old health board system to the HSE there has been certain confusion as to who is the lead in disabilities in each area. I do not use the review in the context of a long-fingered approach. I am talking about having the review completed and report published by mid-June. That part will bring total clarity to those in charge in each specific local health area.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: That concludes Priority Questions.

Deputy Alan Shatter: Even the Minister of State does not know who is in charge.

Deputy John Moloney: I do not want to reduce it to that level of common——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Go raibh maith agat, a Aire Stáit.

Deputy John Moloney: Let me just say——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Go raibh maith agat, a Aire Stáit.

Other Questions.

————

Hospital Staff.

6. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Health and Children the progress that has been made in carrying out an inquiry into the activities of a doctor (details supplied) in the north east againSt whom allegations of abuse have been made; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6983/10] Deputy Mary Harney: I met representatives of the support group, Dignity 4 Patients, on 29 October 2009 to inform them of my decision, in consultation with the Cabinet and the Attorney 75 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.] General, to establish an independent review chaired by the retired High Court judge, Mr. Justice T.C. Smyth, to examine whether a further investigation into the case of Mr. Shine would be of public benefit. Mr. Justice Smyth recently began his work on the review. I am satisfied the terms of reference of the review, which have been published, allow it to give support groups, including Dignity 4 Patients, an opportunity to engage with the process, present their views, be heard in full and have those views taken into account in the outcome of the review. An advertisement appeared yesterday in three national and five local newspapers and in one additional local newspaper today, seeking submissions to the independent review. The review is due to be completed by the middle of the year.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: In light of the fact that the advertisements have appeared in the papers, I understand there is a great deal of pressure on the organisation, Dignity 4 Patients because more people are coming forward. Can the Minister give some type of funding or support to that organisation, even on a temporary basis, because it relies entirely on voluntary help, has no money and is under enormous pressure? I gather the deadline for submissions to Mr. Justice Smyth is 3 March. Could that deadline be extended for the overall umbrella organisation because it wants to make the strongest submission possible? The people concerned are very vulnerable. In some cases they have been through the 1995 review, the whole court process and now there is another review which might possibly be followed by an inquiry. For them it is very important that this is a positive process and that they will not encounter further abuse. They need to know that it is a serious initiative and that if an inquiry is required it will be put in train. I should like if the Minister can give some reassurances in that regard.

Deputy Mary Harney: With regard to the last point made by the Deputy, it is a serious process, and I believe that is accepted. I do not believe somebody of the stature of Mr. Justice Smyth would engage in a process that was not serious. I will give consideration to the deadline of 3 March. I do not know whether we set it or Mr. Justice Smyth did, but I shall have that examined. Dignity 4 Patients has asked for funding and I am well disposed to this. I have asked it to make an application under the health lotto. I do not know whether the application has been received as yet, but I know it is in the process of getting charity status from the Revenue, which is required in order to avail of the funding. I believe that process is underway. However, I am well disposed to giving the organisation some funding, as I am aware of the enormous financial pressure it is under. I believe it represents about 190 former patients of Mr. Shine and perhaps 36 others. The workload is quite considerable, as I am aware.

Deputy James Reilly: I lend my voice of support for some funding for Dignity 4 Patients. It is providing services, as the Minister has said, for quite a number of people, many of whom are men who are at risk of suicide as a consequence of the abuse they have suffered. As with Deputy O’Sullivan I should like to see a serious review and I accept the Minister’s assurance that it will be. Should an inquiry be necessary after this, I should like if the evidence at this review might be considered in the context of such a further inquiry, so that victims will not have to subject themselves to further interview, unless they want to. Apart from the funding needed by Dignity 4 Patients, the victims need services. They need to be looked after, and while they are very isolated, they are coming together although still finding it very difficult to talk about this. They need psychological support, counselling services etc. and this must be one of the key considerations.

76 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

Deputy Mary Harney: I do not disagree with that. When the hospital was acquired by the State in the mid-1990s for €5.5 million, I believe, a sum of €2 million was set aside for possible claims, including in this area. That is being administered on behalf of the Medical Missionaries of May by Arthur Cox, solicitors. To date no claim has been made on that €2 million, so I am conscious that this resource is there as well. I agree that psychological and other supports are necessary for the victims. In fairness, many of them have been receiving counselling over many years. I have met some of them and am aware of the vulnerability of many of the individuals concerned. Certainly, all such supports will be forthcoming.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Lives have been seriously scarred as a result of the behaviour of Mr. Shine. Will the review the Minister referred to have the power to properly address the issues involved, not only for the HSE but the former health boards and those formally involved in the hospital administration? Will Mr. Justice Smyth have an opportunity for direct engagement with the Garda Síochána in this regard, and will the Director of Public Prosecutions be quizzed directly by Mr. Justice Smyth? What point are we at as regards the review, and when does the Minister expect that it will finalise its business? Will the review information be published and made available publicly here for Members of the Oireachtas? If it is too soon to make a judgment call as to whether it will offer closure, I would speculate, having spoken to victims of Mr. Shine, that it will not — and that only a full open inquiry will give them the closure and finality they desire.

Deputy Mary Harney: It is expected the review will be completed in the summer and to a large extent it will be a precursor to what the Deputy terms a public inquiry. There will be enormous reluctance to engage in a public inquiry or indeed even an inquiry under the Com- missions of Investigation Act, unless this is warranted. That is precisely what the Mr. Justice Smyth has been asked to do — and in that regard to speak to whoever is relevant. Clearly, the justice cannot cut across any possible criminal investigation, because this matter is also being investigated by the Garda Síochána, given that some of the circumstances may have changed since the previous criminal prosecutions. I am aware that the Garda Síochána is looking at the relevant issues, It is a matter for the Garda, rather than for me and neither could we establish a review that would look at the role of the DPP, the Garda Síochána or any trial that took place. I have explained that to Dignity 4 Patients, which I believe it understands. The intention is to have the review available by the middle of the year and in the first instance I should like Dignity 4 Patients to have access to it. Subsequent to that, of course it will be made public.

Cancer Screening Programme.

7. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Health and Children if parents that paid hundreds of euro to vaccinate their daughters againSt cervical cancer will be refunded; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6907/10] Deputy Mary Harney: I have always accepted the consensus view of the relevant expert bodies that the introduction of a universal high uptake vaccination programme in young girls, in conjunction with population based cervical screening, could significantly reduce overall cervical cancer incidence. The issue was not, therefore, whether the case for a cervical cancer vaccination programme was accepted by myself and the Government — because it always was — but the priority to be accorded to such a programme within the resources available for public health services and for the cancer programme in particular. Recently I requested the HSE to initiate a tendering process for the procurement of an HPV vaccine with a view to commencing a HPV vaccination programme for all girls in first year in 77 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.] secondary school and until this process was completed I was not in a position to say if or when I would introduce this programme. This tendering process for the vaccine is now complete. We can now purchase the vaccine at a price much lower than we expected to pay in 2008 and at a price much closer to what is being paid in other countries. In these circumstances, the programme can now be delivered from the extra resources committed in this year’s budget to the overall cancer programme. The HSE is committed to starting this campaign during the current school year. This will involve the free vaccination of up to 30,000 girls mainly in school settings. Details of the full programme will be announced by the HSE in the near future and will involve the vaccine being offered each year to all girls in first year in secondary school. Unfortunately it will not be possible to refund the costs of vaccinations administered privately.

Deputy James Reilly: I have a number of points for the Minister and then a question. I wholeheartedly welcome the Minister’s decision to go ahead with the vaccination programme. She knows my views and everyone else is aware of them, too, in terms of the importance of this. It was never a case of either or, but rather of both together. I am glad she now confirms that she always accepted that because we had a debate here and the eminent Deputy O’Hanlon cast aspersions on articles in the New England Journal of Medicine as regards safety issues around that vaccine. In fact there are not. Why can the Minister not find it in her heart to recompense those who were responsible, proactive and decided to vaccinate their children againSt this risk? A gesture towards reimbursing the cost of the vaccine is the minimum that could be done, I suggest The cost would be incurred anyway and it would be a gesture to the parents of those children who went through financial hardship and paid up to €600. While I am on my feet the Minister might consider settling with Sanofi Pasteur for the remaining debt that I and my group owe them for the children we vaccinated.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Personal pleading is not allowed.

Deputy Mary Harney: I am sure it would be highly inappropriate for Deputy Reilly to use question time to advance any personal interests.

Deputy James Reilly: It was not a personal interest, it was a public interest.

Deputy Mary Harney: It was never intended to do a catch-up and one must begin a new programme somewhere. That has been the case in most countries, especially those that have had a country-wide programme. I accept that is not the case everywhere but it has been the case in most places. One must begin somewhere. At the time we accepted the HIQA report and made a decision to proceed with the vaccine we had hoped to start the programme one year earlier and to do a catch up. However, since we gave a commitment to a particular group of girls they will now be vaccinated. They are in first year now and would have been in sixth class at the time. Originally, we intended to do this in primary school because we have a track record of immunisation programmes in primary schools. Now it will be done in secondary school but it will catch the same group of girls that would have received it in sixth class last year. Given the resource constraints, which are considerable as I remarked earlier, I am not in a position to repay the high cost of €600 to the individuals that availed of it. I acknowledge the cost was high relative to the price for which we can now procure the vaccine.

78 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I also welcome the fact the programme is being introduced. However, I refer to the people who paid for it themselves. In fairness to them, they were originally informed the programme would be put in place and they were then informed it would be delayed. By that time there was a good deal of media attention on the issue and a belief among the parents concerned that it was very important for their daughters to get this vaccine. They were not to know that the Minister would introduce the programme in the first year of secondary school instead of sixth class in primary school. There is a case for people to be recompensed. I am unsure how the Minister might do so but there is a case to be made. I remember distinctly a Traveller lady visited my clinic and informed me she would try to save up the money to have her daughter vaccinated because she had heard it was important to do so. When we debated the matter here at the time it was announced the programme would not go ahead, we stated in the Chamber it could be done a good deal cheaper than the original HIQA costing presented to the Minister. I met representatives of at least one of the companies that makes the vaccine. They informed me they could do it a good deal cheaper. Did the Minister approach the companies before she originally announced the decision to cancel the programme?

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: My question is not unrelated. First, to give the Minister a head-spin altogether, there is now a trio of health spokespersons from the Opposition saying “Well done.” I agree fully with the decision to go ahead with this vaccine and I am pleased to say the Minister has done the right thing in this case. I refer to the issue of cost The Minister’s original estimate or the estimate provided to her was, if I recall correctly, some €16 million for the HPV, human papilloma virus, vaccine. Now, a figure of €3 million has been indicated for this roll-out. Will the Minister explain this? An initial read would suggest the explanation of such a difference is that there must have been an inordinate profit involved for the pharmaceutical companies. I refer to public information. What proactive information programme does the Minister intend to roll out to inform teachers, principals, parents and pupils such that there is an understanding of the importance of the vaccine and its uptake?

Deputy Mary Harney: I thank Deputies for their generous comments. We will be proactive in the first instance with parents because we are vaccinating minors and parents must give their permission. This programme is currently being worked on by the HSE and will be announced shortly. We wish to start the vaccination programme before the summer because individuals must receive three doses during this calendar year and we must have a record of such individuals and so on. Regarding cost, soundings were take from the companies even after the decision to postpone the programme from 2008 and 2009 to 2010. I met representatives from both companies. The figures being advanced at the time were substantially different from what subsequently tran- spired. To be fair to the two companies, they responded to my request and to the current financial circumstances in which the country finds itself. We are all aware from colleagues in other countries that large markets get pharmaceutical products, including vaccines, at substantially reduced prices, unlike small markets such as Ireland. Since we were aware of information from our nearest neighbours in respect of the cost, we were able to request that the companies respond in a similar fashion in Ireland to the way in which they responded in the UK and they did so. The cost reduction from €16 million to €3 million is not only savings in vaccine. Clearly, the bulk of the savings are from the vaccine but there are also savings on the administration of the vaccine by the HSE, the cost of which has been considerably reduced as well. 79 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.]

It is unfortunate and I am loath to say it because it sounds churlish, but we are not able to repay individuals who may have paid €600. We are simply not in a position to do so.

Deputy James Reilly: Will the Minister reimburse the people the cost of the vaccine that she would otherwise pay, which is only €100 per head? It would be a gesture.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister can reflect upon that.

Health Service Staff.

8. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Health and Children the categories of workers in the health services who are vetted by the Garda vetting services; her plans to expand this to other categories; if she has satisfied herself at the length of time such vetting takes; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6995/10] Deputy Mary Harney: Garda vetting is a pre-employment check carried out if a prospective employee, volunteer or student on placement will have unsupervised access to children or vulnerable adults. Garda vetting provides for the disclosure by the Garda central vetting unit to the prospective employer of details of prosecutions and convictions of the candidate. It is a matter for the employer to assess the implications of the information before a decision is taken on the candidate’s suitability to take up duty. From 1995, the former health boards conducted Garda vetting of all prospective employees who would have access to children and vulnerable adults. In 2007, the Health Service Executive extended this requirement to all prospective new employees and existing employees considered for promotion. The processing of requests by the HSE now takes approximately ten to 12 weeks. Processing time fluctuates depending on seasonal demands and volumes received. I understand that in the event of the critical filling of a position, the HSE uses a fast-track facility and this arrangement is working satisfactorily. The fast-track takes between one and two weeks. The Office of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, in conjunction with the Depart- ment of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, is currently preparing draft heads of a Bill for consideration by the Government. The Bill will include proposals to provide a statutory basis for the vetting of persons to identify those who are unsuitable to work with children and vulnerable adults. In particular, this will deal with the issue of soft information, an issue I realise is of considerable concern, rather than simply prosecutions and convictions.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: When can we expect that legislation? I realise we have raised the matter several times on the Order of Business but when I came into this Chamber first some ten years ago, the Bill was on the list It was the responsibility of a different Department at that time. This has been a long time coming. The Minister stated anyone within the health services who will be working with children or vulnerable people will be vetted. Will the Minister clarify this statement? Sometimes, there is an issue of delay. I am unsure whether this can be done any quicker and I note there is a fast- track procedure. However, recently I encountered a case involving a student nurse who applied for work experience. Sometimes, in such cases there is not a long lead-in time. I realise my colleague, Deputy Mary Upton, raised this matter on the Order of Business this morning in respect of sports facilities. I am unsure whether the Minister has any answers in this regard. There is a concern that it is not taking place as quickly as it should. However, I welcome the fact it is pretty comprehensive within the health services now. 80 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

Deputy Mary Harney: I cannot provide a date for the legislation because it is subject to the all-party committee. The heads have not yet come before the Government but I understand it is imminent. I will revert to the Deputy on this matter because I am uncertain. In the first instance, the vetting relates to all new employees including students on placement, volunteers working in the area and people who are promoted. However, the intention is to apply it retrospectively to everyone and this is taking place on a phased basis. The resources for Garda vetting are a matter for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and I do not have any information in respect of it.

Deputy James Reilly: This is a very serious issue which I have raised before, not only in respect of new employees. I am aware of a situation that occurred last year in which an ambulance company took over another private ambulance company and 12 of the 20 drivers did not have Garda clearance but they had been working for some considerable time. Vetting is very important, particularly in the mental health service. The Minister of State responsible for mental health, Deputy John Moloney, is present and I would like him to assure me everybody working in the mental health service has been vetted by the Garda because the patients are very vulnerable. Given that we have heard the Central Mental Hospital is to come to Portrane, will the Minister of State, Deputy Moloney, meet the locals to allay any fears they have and keep them on side? It is a positive development and if the locals are kept in the loop, there will not be a problem.

Deputy Mary Harney: I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy John Moloney, can answer that when replying to the next question.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Any Minister can reply.

Deputy Mary Harney: I agree with Deputy Reilly that appropriate vetting is important, irrespective of whether one’s employer is in the public or private sector. One issue that arises in the health area is the great number of staff who have come from overseas to work in Ireland. The Garda must work in conjunction with Interpol to vet them and this can often take some time. I am satisfied there has been vetting of all new staff since 1995, which is quite some time ago. Those who were employed prior to 1995 are being dealt with on a retrospective basis as quickly as the HSE can do so.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: While I accept that rushed legislation can often be flawed, I, as a member of Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children, must nevertheless avail of the opportunity to urge the Minister to make the necessary intervention to expedite the introduction of the legislation, working from the first report of the committee on the subject of soft information. I say this againSt the backdrop of all the terrible circumstances that have presented recently and the great need to ensure every protection for children. It will be an indictment of us all in political life if we do not see results from the long period that representatives of all parties, including the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, have spent on the committee’s work. I urge intervention with the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Barry Andrews.

Deputy Mary Harney: I will be happy to do that although I know the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, is really committed in this area. He is very anxious to have the matter dealt with as quickly as possible. We all know those who are likely to abuse children have a habit of infiltrating places where children congregate, including swimming clubs and sports clubs. There were some very high-profile examples in recent years. 81 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

[Deputy Mary Harney.]

With regard to the legislation on soft information, we are at present restricted under law in terms of prosecutions and convictions. It is often extremely difficult to secure prosecutions and convictions in this area. Having legislation on soft information will be invaluable to protecting children and vulnerable adults.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: It is unfair to the many good people who work with children in a credible way in various organisations to spread the idea that children are only at risk in those organisations. The tragic reality is that children are most at risk in the home.

Deputy Mary Harney: In case there is any misunderstanding, I must state that is of course the case. The vast majority, 99%, of those involved in sports organisations, including swimming organisations, are involved for the right reason. The vast majority of incidents of abuse occur in the home. We need stronger legislation to allow for the exchange of soft information without fear of prosecution.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: Many people working in child care come from abroad. Is there a difficulty in obtaining the necessary information on them?

Deputy Mary Harney: No, but the process takes longer. The Garda, through Interpol, con- tacts its counterparts in other countries on the issue.

Deputy John Moloney: I thank Deputy Reilly for his comment on the Central Mental Hospital. The issue has been brought to my attention by him and Deputies Kennedy and O’Brien. No formal decision has been taken on the location in Portrane. My strategy was based on the hope that we would first determine the means of funding the project. I had hoped to have that done——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We cannot have a debate on a question that was not asked.

Deputy John Moloney: My intention is to have a public meeting in Portrane to explain why we are thinking of locating there rather than having people believe our decision was made in advance of their having an input. There has not yet been a formal decision. The Government must decide, over the next three months, how to fund the project. I intend to meet the residents in public when we have some objections.

Substance Misuse.

9. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on a recent OECD report which shows that Ireland ranks among the top consumers of alcohol; if she will fast-track the publication of the new substance misuse strategy that is to tackle alcohol misuse; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [47015/09] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): The average rate of alcohol consumption in Ireland has consistently been among the highest in the European Union. My Department will continue to seek to reduce the overall level of alcohol consumption in the population to reduce the burden of alcohol-related harm on the health services and society in general. To tackle the problems associated with alcohol use and misuse, we need to take responsibility both collectively and individually. There is social acceptance of alcohol in society and we need to question the signal this is sending, particularly to young people. On 31 March 2009, the Government agreed to include alcohol in a national substance misuse strategy that would be co-ordinated jointly by the Department of Community, Rural and Gael- 82 Other 11 February 2010. Questions tacht Affairs and my Department. A steering group has been established to develop the alcohol element of the strategy. It will base its recommendations on effective evidence-based measures to deal with the significant public health issue of alcohol in areas such as supply, pricing, prevention, treatment, awareness and education. The steering group is meeting on a monthly basis and it is expected that its report will be submitted to the Government by the end of this year.

Deputy Catherine Byrne: I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I am grateful to hear the report will be submitted by the end of the year. The Minister of State said that, according to the OECD report, we are 40% worse off in Ireland with regard to alcohol than we were in the 1980s. The number of young people under 15 who are drinking, especially binge drinking, has increased. As a parent, I am very conscious of alcohol-related problems at weekends when my children go to parties or the picture house. I am always afraid I will get the dreaded telephone call. I did get one last year because my young daughter ended up with a bottle in her face. I spent 11 hours in the accident and emergency unit with her and she had to get five stitches on the bridge of her nose. There is a lot in the Minister of State’s reply and I appreciate the fact that the steering group has been set up. It is urgent that it produce its report. There are still many alcohol-related practices that need to be curtailed. I refer in particular to the activities of off-licences and dial- a-can services and to the admission of intoxicated young people to nightclubs where they are served even more alcohol. I ask the Minister to address these issues with a sense of urgency, particularly given that so many young people have changed their lifestyles in the family home and their attitudes to alcohol. Last week, I attended a function in a hotel and paid €12 for four bottles of Coca-Cola. This price is outrageous. My young daughter went to a disco last year in town and was charged €3.50 for a bottle of water. Something must be done to curtail this abuse of the system.

Deputy Áine Brady: I thank the Deputy. I appreciate the point she made. I, too, am a mother and have four children. I appreciate the concern we all have about giving the wrong message to young people. I agree with the Deputy’s point on young people drinking in the family home. This is why the steering group was set up. It will make proposals for the overall national substance misuse strategy to be incorporated into the national drugs strategy. It will be reporting to the Minister for Health and Children by the end of October 2010. The proposals will be made to the Govern- ment by the end of 2010.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Is the Minister aware of the European Charter on Alcohol and the Declaration on Young People and Alcohol? Have the Government and the Depart- ment of Health and Children given due consideration to the recommendations contained therein? Acting upon them would make a very helpful contribution to combating the abuse of alcohol, which is what we are trying to achieve. The charter and declaration list quite a number of very sound and sensible steps to be taken.

Deputy Áine Brady: The steering group has been asked to review existing policies and reports, including those produced at EU and international levels, such that it will identify effective policies and actions to prevent the harm caused to individuals and society by alcohol abuse.

83 Other 11 February 2010. Questions

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: The Minister of State said there is social acceptance of alcohol in Ireland. There is social acceptance of alcohol in France also but there is no social acceptance of its abuse; that is the difference. In what way does the Minister interact with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform? As we know, it is illegal to sell alcohol to minors, yet, as Deputy Catherine Byrne said, the use of alcohol among them is widespread. If we could prevent them buying or accessing alcohol, we would be able to address the problem in some way. Has the Minister of State had much interaction with her colleagues at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in respect of this matter?

Deputy James Reilly: Last night’s “Operation Transformation” programme put across a message in respect of a matter in which I am particularly interested, namely, that the calorific content of alcohol should be listed on the side of all bottles which contain alcohol. People do not realise the number of calories a bottle of alcohol contains. There are health implications in this regard. It would be of assistance to those, particularly younger people, who are conscious of their physical well-being, etc.

Deputy Mary Harney: That is why they are smoking.

Deputy James Reilly: The number of units of alcohol contained in a bottle of alcohol should also be listed. The information provided should list the number of grammes and also indicate what constitutes a unit. Many people are of the view that there are only six units of alcohol in a bottle of wine. However, the average bottle of wine contains nine units.

Deputy Catherine Byrne: When the report is published, will there be an opportunity to consider how alcohol is advertised? This is particularly relevant in that young children and teenagers might be present when advertisements for alcohol are shown on television. Will the report refer to the cost of soft drinks?

Deputy Áine Brady: The health promotion unit is considering the issues of labelling and advertising in the context of alcohol. As already stated, the steering group will be examining the policies and actions in the context of five pillars, namely, supply, prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and research. I am in contact with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in respect of that matter.

Services for People with Disabilities.

10. Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for Health and Children when she will introduce legislation to regulate and inspect disability services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6863/10]

49. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on reports that more than 500 complaints were made in the past two and a half years relating to the treatment of persons with disabilities in residential care; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6967/10]

56. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Health and Children when all residential care centres for persons with disabilities will be subject to independent standards and inspection; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6966/10] Deputy John Moloney: I proposed to take Questions Nos. 10, 49 and 56 together. As Deputies will be aware, the National Quality Standards: Residential Settings for People with Disabilities, which relate to adult services, have been published by HIQA. Following a public consultation process initiated by HIQA, these standards were formulated by a standards 84 Other 11 February 2010. Questions advisory group which comprised officials from HIQA, the Department, the HSE, service providers, organisations representing people with disabilities and service users. These standards will provide a national framework for quality, safe services for persons with disabilities in a residential setting. In light of the current economic situation, the move to full statutory implementation of the standards, including regulation and inspection, presents significant challenges at this time. However, notwithstanding the difficulties of immediate statutory implementation, the Depart- ment, the HSE and HIQA have agreed that progressive non-statutory implementation of the standards will now commence and that they will become the benchmark againSt which the HSE assesses both its own directly-operated facilities and other facilities that it funds. Discussions are ongoing regarding the development of self-assessment tools, providing awareness training for service providers and the introduction of an appropriate level of external validation for relevant settings. A number of preliminary processes are already in place within the HSE to facilitate this work. For example, compliance with the HIQA standards is included in the service level agreements being implemented between the HSE and service providers. As part of the ongoing review of service level agreements, service providers will now be required to demonstrate compliance with the standards through the provision of audit outcomes. I am informed by the HSE that the majority of service providers have already commenced a review of their services within the context of the HIQA standards. Many service providers have also achieved external accreditation over the past number of years. I am assured by the HSE that it has a robust system in place to deal with any complaints made in respect of the treatment of persons with disabilities in residential care. This includes ensuring that all HSE-funded service providers of residential care have appropriate complaints procedures that are in line with HSE policy.

Deputy James Reilly: The Minister of State will acknowledge that there are 8,000 adults and 400 children in institutions of care and that there are no independent inspectors. Hundreds of complaints have been made about these institutions in the past two years. These complaints relate to issues from poor accommodation to allegations of abuse or neglect. Last year, the Ryan report illustrated the extent of the abuse that took place in industrial schools in the past This week, “Primetime” reminded us of the dreadful living conditions and absence of thera- peutic treatments in State psychiatric hospitals and institutions. I know the Minister of State accepts that we must protect the disabled from abuse. I put it to him, however, that the €5 million that could have been saved by applying the full 5% pay cut to senior civil servants would pay for this inspectorate to be put in place by the end of the year. I am seeking from him a commitment to the effect that he will find the money to allow this to happen. We are discussing the most vulnerable people in our society and they must be protected.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I support the comments made by Deputy Reilly. More than 500 complaints have been made in the past two and a half years. There is a need to shine a light on these institutions. The Joint Committee on Health and Children, of which some of those present are members, must visit these facilities and members of the public must make constant visits to their relatives and friends within them. Unfortunately for many of those who live in these institutions, no one visits them or sees what is happening.

Deputy James Reilly: They do not have anyone to speak for them. 85 Cancer Screening 11 February 2010. Programme

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: What is planned is welcome but it must be put in place sooner rather than later. As public representatives, we have a duty to visit the institutions to which I refer.

Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Deputy Jan O’Sullivan referred to the 500 complaints that have been made in the past two and a half years. The reality is that the people living in these institutions are often voiceless and are not in a position to make such complaints, which underlines the need to put in place an inspection regime.

Deputy John Moloney: I do not want to offer excuses in respect of this extremely important issue. Last year, Inclusion Ireland complained that we were not carrying out inspections in respect of children. The position in this regard has changed and such inspections will be forthcoming before the end of this year. I wish I could say when all of these matters will be dealt with. The report is imminent and I am committed to securing the funding to provide for an inspectorate. I take the point made by the Deputies in respect of the many people who live in institutions of this nature. While I accept that 500 is a large number of complaints — I do not wish to reduce the import of what was said by Members opposite in this regard — many of those complaints could easily have been dealt with if the inspectorate were in place.

Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.

Adjournment Debate Matters. Acting Chairman (Deputy Charlie O’Connor): I wish to advise the House of the following matters in respect of which notice has been given under Standing Order 21 and the name of the Member in each case: (1) Deputy Alan Shatter — the need to reunite a mother who has been deported from the State with her son who is in foster care here; (2) Deputy Róisín Shortall — the need to reinstate funding to projects mainstreamed in local drugs task force areas; (3) Deputy Jimmy Deenihan — the delay in providing a mammography machine at Kerry General Hospital; and (4) Deputy Joe Costello — the proposals for the future of Fitzgibbon Street and Mountjoy Garda Stations, Dublin 1. The matters raised by Deputies Jimmy Deenihan, Alan Shatter and Joe Costello have been selected for discussion.

Adjournment Debate.

————

Cancer Screening Programme. Deputy Jimmy Deenihan: The HSE south relocated the initial diagnostic and surgical symptomatic breast care services from Kerry General Hospital to Cork University Hospital, CUH, in October 2008. At the time, Professor Tom Keane made a commitment that follow up mammography screening for those patients who had undergone surgery at CUH would be carried out at Kerry General Hospital, KGH, and that the necessary facilities, including the provision of a new digital mammography machine to be purchased following the decommissioning of the existing machine, would be put in place for that purpose. This occurred in March 2009. Women who had undergone surgery at CUH and who were then obliged to travel to Cork for follow up care began to contact me with regard to the promised digital mammography unit in Tralee. In response to their concerns, I wrote to both the hospital network manager of the HSE south and the general manager of KGH seeking an update on the replacement of the mammography machine. On 28 May 2009, the General Manager of KGH indicated that a 86 Cancer Screening 11 February 2010. Programme digital mammography unit would be installed in the following few weeks and that the service would then recommence. On 3 June 2009, in a response from the hospital network manager of the HSE south, I was informed that:

[F]ollowing decommissioning of the existing digital mammography machine at KGH, a new digital mammography machine has been purchased at a cost of €340,000 by the NCCP and technical plans are being finalized for its installation and commissioning at KGH. This work will take approximately three weeks to complete. Mammography radiography staff from CUH will attend at KGH on a weekly basis, as required, and a digital link will also be installed which will enable scans to be reported by Consultant Radiologists at CUH. Mammography radiography staff from Cork University Hospital, CUH, were to attend at Kerry General Hospital, KGH, on a weekly basis, as required, and a digital link would also be installed which would enable scans to be reported by consultant radiologists at CUH. This, however, has not happened.

This week in The Kerryman, Marisa Reidy wrote:

Four months after the HSE announced it was making space within the radiology room at Kerry General Hospital for a long-promised mammography machine, it has emerged the executive is still no closer to installing the cancer-screening unit. The news comes almost eight months after the HSE wrote to The Kerryman confirming that a new digital mammography machine would be installed and commissioned in KGH within “three to four weeks”— and almost a year and a half since it first promised such facilities would be made available to the women of Kerry. Despite assurances from the HSE last October that the machine would be operational once additional space had been created within the radiology room, KGH is still no closer to having the machine installed. Following another query from The Kerryman this week as to the status of the long-awaited machine, it emerged that the required space has still not been created, as a contractor assesses what the HSE terms this “specialist programme of works.” A HSE letter sent to The Kerryman this week, advises, “that a contractor has now been secured to carry out the installation works required for this project which will comprise creation of additional space within the radiology department to accommodate the size of the new unit. As this is a relatively specialist programme of works, the selected contractor is currently liaising with technical services at Kerry General Hospital to comprehensively scope and confirm the programme of works required,” the letter concluded. The HSE would not be drawn on an exact date for installation, but moved to assure the public that once installed, mammography radiography staff from CUH will attend at KGH on a weekly basis, as required, and a digital link will also be installed which will enable scans to be reported by consultant radiologists at CUH.

This matter has gone on for far too long. There were major protests in Kerry againSt the removal of this unit to CUH. Eventually, the people of Kerry accepted it on condition that after-care services would be provided immediately at KGH. This has not occurred despite these commitments. It is most unfair on the large number of Kerry women who must go to Cork for surgery and, in the future, for screening, which is a simple 20 minute procedure.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): Iam replying to this Adjournment matter on behalf of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, who cannot attend the Chamber this evening due to a prearranged appointment. 87 Cancer Screening 11 February 2010. Programme

[Deputy John Moloney.]

The national cancer control strategy was clear that to achieve better cancer prevention, detection and survival, there should be eight specialist cancer centres, each serving a population of approximately 500,000. In the HSE southern region, CUH and Waterford Regional Hospital have been designated as the cancer centres. The first priority for the HSE’s national cancer control programme, NCCP, has been the transfer of breast cancer diagnostic and surgical services to the eight centres. As part of this process, these services were relocated from KGH to CUH in October 2008. On 1 December last, the remaining services in the region were amalgamated into the new regional cancer centre at CUH. These included the South Infirmary symptomatic breast service, the Mercy University Hospital pathology service and BreastCheck surgery. The breast care unit at the Regional Cancer Centre South is now the largest in the country. It is expected it will see more than 10,000 patients annually and diagnose approximately 520 symptomatic patients with breast cancer. The HSE’s most recent performance report shows that the service is 100% compliant with waiting time targets for new patient referrals, which set out that 95% of urgent referrals should be seen within two weeks. The Government provided €5.75 million to develop the centre at CUH. This development includes diagnostic clinics and treatment facilities incorporating mammography imaging services, ultrasound, pathology-laboratory services, patient waiting areas and support services. Additional consultants, nurses, radiographers, medical scientists and administrative staff were appointed to the new centre. Women in the Kerry area who are referred to the CUH symptomatic breast service travel to Cork for their initial assessment. For the majority, they will not have a diagnosis of breast cancer and will require no further follow up treatment in Cork. Where a woman has a diagnosis of breast cancer which requires surgery, the operation will also take place in Cork. For women who may need financial assistance with the cost of travel to the breast service at Cork, as at the other centres, the NCCP provides funding through the Travel2Care scheme, administered by the Irish Cancer Society. In the case of women who require chemotherapy, this can and is being delivered in Kerry in accordance with protocols set out by the multidisciplinary team based in Cork. The breast care nurse based in Kerry links with the multidisciplinary team meetings at CUH on a weekly basis. Follow-up mammography for patients of the CUH symptomatic service who have undergone surgery will also be carried out at KGH once the necessary facilities and resources are put in place for this purpose. Following decommissioning of the existing mammography machine at KGH, a new digital mammography machine has been purchased at a cost of €340,000 by the NCCP. Technical plans for its installation have been developed and a contractor has been secured to carry out the installation works required, specifically the creation of additional space within the radiology department to accommodate the new mammography unit. This will include a digital link and integration with the systems at CUH. As this is a relatively specialist programme of works, the selected contractor is currently liaising with technical services at KGH to scope and confirm the programme of works required comprehensively. Until the follow-up mammography service is in place in Kerry, women in the region will continue to have follow-up mammography provided at CUH. The new mammography service at KGH is specifically for the provision of follow-up mammography for patients of the CUH symptomatic service. Screening mammography is carried out only by BreastCheck, the national breast screening programme. BreastCheck began screen- 88 Deportation 11 February 2010. Orders ing in County Kerry in April 2009 from a mobile digital screening unit using digital mammography. Screening in the county will continue until first-round screening has been offered to the approximately 13,000 women aged between 50 and 64 in Kerry. However, any woman, irrespective of age, who has immediate concerns or symptoms should contact her GP who, where appropriate, will refer her to the symptomatic services. The completion of the transfer of breast cancer diagnostic and surgical services to the eight cancer centres is a major milestone. It enables us to be confident that the service being provided is in accordance with international best practice. This is crucially important in ensuring women diagnosed with breast cancer have the best possible chance for positive outcomes.

Deportation Orders. Deputy Alan Shatter: I raised the plight of the child in question in a parliamentary question to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on 10 December 2009. 5oOn’clock 16 August 2009, the Nigerian mother of this child was arrested in Dublin Airport for evading a deportation order. She was deported on 1 September. Her four-year-old son, who was born in the State, was temporarily placed in care on 16 August, and the HSE properly made an application to the children’s court under the Child Care Act 1991 for directions on the child’s welfare. The child was properly cared for, and prior to the airport incident, was never apart from his mother. The Children Court, required to make decisions protecting children’s welfare, found he should not be deported. Despite this, the Minister went ahead with the mother’s deportation. Since August the child has been cared for in four different temporary fosterage arrangements with at least three different HSE social workers involved with the child. There is little doubt the mother was in the State illegally and had since 2005 evaded deportation. While this was unacceptable, it was not the child’s fault and he should not be punished for it. The Minister justified the unacceptable treatment of this child on the basis that he is not an Irish citizen and that a majority in 2004 voted for a constitutional change to ensure children born to foreign nationals residing for a short time in the State would not automatically acquire citizenship. I do not believe that those who voted in favour of constitutional change had anticipated that the State would kidnap a child from his mother in Dublin airport and simply deport the mother without regard to consequences for the child. Once the future care and welfare of this child became an issue that required a decision of the Children’s Court, deportation of the mother should have been postponed to facilitate all issues relating to this child’s welfare being given proper consideration. In response to my Dáil question on 10 December last, the Minister stated:

An application has now been received from the court appointed guardian ad litem of the child in question requesting that the deportation order in respect of his mother be revoked to allow her to re-enter the State to be reunited with him. This application, made under section 3(11) of the Immigration Act 1999 as amended, is under consideration at present and a decision will issue shortly.

I am not aware of any decision yet having been made. There is a total disconnect between the approach taken by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law and the Garda in the arrest and deportation of the mother and the retention of her child and the approach prescribed in the Children First: National Guidelines for the Protection and Welfare of Children, which emphasise that it is generally in the interest of a 89 Deportation 11 February 2010. Orders

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] child’s welfare that he or she be brought up by his or her parent or parents and when separated from them, that all necessary steps be taken to effect family reunification. From a child welfare perspective, the disastrous events that occurred are indefensible but from a State cost perspective, thousands of euros of taxpayers money have now been spent by the HSE in maintaining a child in care who could still be residing in the State with his mother and by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the HSE in legal representation before the Children’s Court. The continuing situation can only do profound damage to this young boy’s immediate and long-term welfare. The longer it goes on the greater the damage to the child’s capacity as an adult to make and maintain bonds or attachments. This situation can properly be described as child abuse or as inhuman and torturous treatment by the State of an innocent child. It is an exact contradiction of what the Minister, Dermot Ahern, stated on the steps of Government Buildings on the day of publication of the Murphy commission report. On that occasion, he was critical of the church’s cover up of clerical abuse and of its motivation to avoid scandal stating that “the welfare of children counted for nothing”. His criticism was hollow as clearly in the Minister’s view the welfare of this child also counts for nothing and is of no value and no concern. The Murphy commission report also addressed what the Minister described, on its launch, as “the failings by agencies of the State”. This case classically and starkly illustrates yet another failure by State agencies to give priority to the welfare of a child. This Minister, who is never slow to defend himself, has at no stage made any public response to questions raised by me in an article in The Irish Times on 22 December last and I can only regard this as an implicit acknowledgement by him that this mother and child should not be treated this way. I call on the Minister, in these exceptional circumstances, to allow the mother of this child return to the State to care for and bring up her son here, in the overwhelming interests of the child’s welfare. The Child Care Act 1991 give priority to the protection of the welfare of children, as did the child protection guidelines of 1999 and as do the December 2009 newly-published guidelines. The Minister should prioritise the welfare of this child and bring this sorry and tragic episode to an end. He should allow the mother return to Ireland and the child to be reunited with his mother and removed from the care system. A child is currently in care who does not require the care of the State and is only getting such care because the State has deported the child’s mother. It is an extraordinary and scandalous situation.

Deputy John Moloney: By way of responding, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is keeping faith with the statement he made on the steps of Government Buildings that day and if the issue is one of reuniting the mother with the child, I may be able to explain that. I preface my reply by reminding the House that the Minister dealt with this matter in some detail on 10 December 2009 when he responded to an oral parliamentary question from Deputy Shatter on the same matter. I am aware of the opinion piece Deputy Shatter wrote for The Irish Times in support of his case on the same subject. In that article, it would appear that Deputy Shatter largely ignored the facts of the case as they had been presented by the Minister in response to the earlier parliamentary question. The case in question is that of a Nigerian woman who arrived in this State in August 2005 and claimed asylum at that time. Her son was born in this State just two days after her arrival here but, based on the provisions of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004, he is not an Irish citizen. The woman, two days after the birth, included her son in her asylum application 90 Deportation 11 February 2010. Orders meaning that any decision taken in her case applied equally to him. Arising from the refusal of the asylum application, she was notified, by letter dated 25 October 2005, that the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform proposed to make deportation orders in respect of herself and her son and she was invited to submit written representations setting out reasons deportation orders should not be made. Representations were submitted on her behalf at that time. Following the consideration of her case under the relevant statutory provisions, deportation orders were signed in respect of mother and son on 23 November 2005 and notified to them by registered letter dated 29 November 2005. They failed to present to the Garda National Immigration Bureau, GNIB, as required, and were therefore classified as persons evading deportation. They continued to evade their deportation for more than three and a half years until, on 16 August 2009, mother and son were apprehended by officers of the GNIB at Dublin Airport. Following questioning by the immigration officer and checks on the relevant Garda database, they were identified as persons who were evading deportation. At this point, the mother was arrested and detained and she was conveyed to the Women’s Prison, Dóchas centre. As this prison had limited facilities for children, and in accordance with well established procedures, the woman in question was given the option of putting her son voluntarily into the care of the Health Service Executive, HSE. She refused to do so and as a result the arresting garda was left with no option but to execute his powers under section 12 of the Child Care Act 1991 to secure appropriate care for the child. In accordance with HSE procedures, that body sought and was granted an emergency care order on 17 August 2009, at which point the child was placed in the care of the HSE. An interim care order was subsequently granted on 24 August 2009. The Deputy will appreciate that all aspects of the case relating to the child’s care are the responsibility of the HSE, however, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has no evidence to suggest that the welfare needs of this child have not been or are not being met. Given that the woman in question and her son were the subject of valid deportation orders, arrangements were made to have them both repatriated to Nigeria by chartered flight on 1 September 2009. On this date an application was made by the HSE to have the interim care order lifted to allow the child to accompany his mother to Nigeria. The application was refused by the District Court and the child remained in the care of the HSE. As a result, the woman in question was repatriated without her son.

Deputy Alan Shatter: That is what should not have happened, and the District Court reached that decision based on the child’s welfare.

Deputy John Moloney: I will put it this way, if the mother’s intention was to be reunited with her son, she had every option to allow her son travel to Nigeria either ways.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The court obviously agreed with her that it was not in the child’s interests.

Deputy John Moloney: I would have thought that the child’s interests would have been with the natural mother in her home country, Nigeria.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The court made that decision.

Deputy John Moloney: Since her deportation on 1 September 2009, representatives of the bureau have made sustained efforts to communicate with the woman in question in order to 91 Deportation 11 February 2010. Orders

[Deputy John Moloney.] facilitate the return of her son to Nigeria. However, she has refused to co-operate meaning that her son must remain in the care of the HSE until that position changes.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The District Court will not allow the child go back to Nigeria.

Deputy John Moloney: No.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The District Court will not allow the child travel to Nigeria.

Deputy John Moloney: In fact, I understand, during one telephone call with a Garda representative she indicated that she did not wish for her son to be reunited with her in Nigeria.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The District Court judge does not either.

Deputy John Moloney: I would have considered that the mother’s wish would have been first for the maternal part of this response.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The child is just a pawn in all of this.

Deputy John Moloney: The court appointed guardian ad litem of the child in question has submitted an application to have the mother’s deportation order revoked to allow her to re- enter the State to be reunited her son. I understand this application is under consideration by Department officials. It must be emphasised that the woman in question could at any point bring closure to this situation by accepting the repatriation of her son. To date, she has refused to facilitate this in Nigeria. I find it difficult to understand the position she has adopted. It would have to be assumed that she is hoping that while the child remains in this State, her chances of returning to, and remaining in, this State are enhanced. The fact remains that she arrived in this State as an asylum seeker and had all of her protection-related needs considered in detail at all stages of the statutory process. It is difficult to credit how a person whose case has benefited from such detailed consideration could now hold the State’s immigration laws in such contempt and, as such, the Minister does not share Deputy Shatter’s view that the solution to the problem is to have her returned to this State. To do so would only serve to encourage many others to flout the system in similar fashion.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The Minister is pre-judging the consideration he alleges his officials are giving to this. The Minister’s conclusion is that the child stays in care——

Deputy John Moloney: The Minister acknowledges that the priority should be for the child to be with his mother in her home country.

Deputy Alan Shatter: ——indefinitely because——

Deputy John Moloney: We should not use the situation. The facts remain——

Acting Chairman: I thank the Minister of State.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The Minister is using this child.

Acting Chairman: I regret I must move on. 92 Garda 11 February 2010. Stations

Garda Stations. Deputy Joe Costello: I raise the threat of closure of Fitzgibbon Street and Mountjoy Garda stations. There is considerable alarm in the local community about threat of closure of one, or both, of these stations and to the services they provide. Currently, an extensive petition campaign is being conducted by the local community in regard to Fitzgibbon Street Garda station which seeks its retention and opposes its closure. No doubt the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will receive a bundle of signatures from local residents shortly. Last night at the community policing forum in Fitzgibbon Street Garda station, which was attended by a large number of local residents, there was total opposition to any proposal to close the station. There is a proposal to refurbish the station due to its inadequacies but the worry is that once the work is commenced by the OPW and the gardaí are removed from the station, which will be essential for the refurbishment work to take place, the gardaí will not be returned to it. This petition seeks a commitment from the authorities that will not be the case. The recent report from the Garda Inspectorate under chief inspector, Kathleen O’Toole, is worrying because it argues strongly that there should be a maximisation of the number of gardaí available for operational duties. While that is a laudable ambition, it is also code for station closure and is the type of language used by a previous Minister, Michael McDowell, who came to the conclusion that Fitzgibbon and Mountjoy Garda stations should be closed along with a large number of other Garda stations around the country. Fitzgibbon Street Garda station will be refurbished but we do not know what will happen once that is done and I seek a firm commitment that it will be re-opened. Mountjoy Garda station is inextricably linked with the Department’s proposal to close Mountjoy Prison and transfer those prison facilities to Thornton Hall where a site has been obtained for the construction of a new prison. The Garda station is included in the plan for the closure of the prison site. That is a threat to another Garda station. Both stations are in close proximity to each other. Given the considerable increase in the number of burglaries, gangland crimes and illegal drugs crimes in the north inner city, there is a real fear that services and gardaí will be removed from the area and there is concern about the impact that might have on the local community which is already under a degree of pressure. I seek a firm commitment that the Garda services will be retained and a guarantee that Fitzgibbon Street Garda station will re-open once the refurbishment work has been completed and that Mountjoy Garda station will not continue to be part of the Mountjoy Prison closure plan.

Deputy John Moloney: I thank Deputy Costello for raising this matter and I apologise that the Minister cannot be here. On 31 December 2009, the personnel strength at Fitzgibbon Garda station was 122 and the strength at Mountjoy Garda station was 107. Fitzgibbon and Mountjoy Garda stations form part of the DMR north central Garda division. On the same date, the strength of the DMR north central Garda division was 719. There are 22 community gardaí attached to Fitzgibbon Street Garda station and 24 attached to Mountjoy Garda station. Four juvenile liaison officers are attached to the DMR north central Garda division. The allocation of Garda resources, including the distribution of personnel, is a matter for the Garda Commissioner and senior Garda management. They are aided in this by a distribution model which indicates the most effective means of distributing Garda personnel and 93 The 11 February 2010. Adjournment

[Deputy John Moloney.] acts as a guide to Garda management decision-making. It also takes into account different policing variables, including crime trends, socio-economic factors and census information. It is the responsibility of the divisional officer to allocate personnel within each division. I have been informed by the Garda authorities that, due to its condition, it is necessary to temporarily vacate Fitzgibbon Street Garda station to facilitate refurbishment of the premises. During this period, the Garda personnel allocated to Fitzgibbon Street will operate from Mountjoy Garda station. I have also been assured by the Garda authorities that current policing levels will be maintained and that there will be no diminution of the service being provided to the local community. I emphasise that the measures I have referred to will be temporary and that they will be discontinued when the necessary refurbishment work at Fitzgibbon Street station has been completed.

Deputy Joe Costello: What about Mountjoy Garda station?

Deputy John Moloney: I do not have information on Mountjoy Garda station. I will have to respond to the Deputy during the coming week.

Deputy Joe Costello: Will the Minister of State do so?

Deputy John Moloney: I will. I apologise I do not have the information to hand but I will get it for the Deputy before the end of next week.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.20 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 16 February 2010.

94 Questions— 11 February 2010. 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 10, inclusive, answered orally.

Medicinal Products.

11. Deputy Simon Coveney asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to introduce reference pricing; when this will be introduced; the estimated savings from same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6885/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Government has approved my proposal to introduce a system of reference pricing combined with generic substitution under the GMS and community drugs schemes. Reference pricing involves setting a common reimbursement price for groups of substitutable drugs. This will promote price competition in the Irish market and deliver ongoing savings for both the State and for patients. A working group, comprising of officials from my Department and the HSE, and chaired by Mr Mark Moran, is setting out proposed steps for implementing this initiative. I expect to see significant progress on this in 2010, including the identification and implementation of legislative and administrative changes required to give it effect from the start of 2011. Reference pricing will deliver direct savings by limiting reimbursement to the level of the lowest priced product within a reference group. Indirect savings will also occur as a result of increased price competition. The level of savings will depend upon a range of factors. These include the number and type of products included in reference groups, the relative and absolute prices of products within reference groups and the market response for each reference group. The working group is considering all of these factors and will recommend a model that will deliver value for money and ensure continuity of supply of medicines. It is anticipated that reference pricing will be initially targeted at high volume products that have the potential to achieve significant savings. It is also of strategic importance that this model is in place as a significant number of drugs are due to come off patent in the coming years.

Organ Transplants.

12. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of heart and lung transplants conducted here in 2009; if she is satisfied with the number of heart and 95 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] lung transplants that took place in 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6872/10]

30. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to establish an organ transplant authority; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6933/10]

75. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Health and Children if an organ donor opt-out, as opposed to opt-in, scheme is being introduced; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6964/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 12, 30 and 75 together. Heart and lung transplantation operations take place in the Mater Hospital Dublin. Eleven heart transplantation procedures were carried out in 2009; this compares with 4 heart transplants in 2008. Five lung transplantation procedures were carried out in 2009; this compares with 4 lung transplants in 2008. In relation to other organ transplants, 172 kidney transplantation procedures were carried out in Beaumont Hospital in 2009. This compares with 146 kidney transplants in 2008. This is the highest level of kidney transplant procedures ever achieved in the kidney transplantation programme. In addition, 64 liver transplantation procedures were carried out in St Vincent’s Hospital in 2009, which is the second highest number of transplants in the previous 5 years. The 2009 level compares with 58 liver transplants in 2008. It is encouraging that heart and lung organ transplant procedures have increased since last year. Nonetheless, I agree there is a need for a national approach to the organ transplant programmes in Ireland. In this context, I have agreed with the Health Service Executive, as part of its 2010 Service Plan, that it will establish an organ donation and transplantation unit within its existing national structures and resources. This unit will provide a national focal point for reporting, monitoring and assessing organ donation and transplantation activities. It is appropriate that these functions be carried out at a national level, on the basis of regular, comprehensive performance data provided by all the transplant centres. This approach will provide a sound basis for evaluating performance and examining other issues related to transplantation. All the organ transplant programmes depend on the continuing support of the general public through their altruistic decision to donate organs. The different systems of permission for organ donation were the subject of a public consultation in 2009. Ireland’s present opt-in system is based on an individual’s next-of-kin giving permission for organs to be donated after death for transplantation. The alternative opt-out system assumes that an individual’s organs are to be donated after death for transplantation, unless the individual or the next-of-kin explicitly object. Many people have expressed their support for an opt-out system. However, organ recipient and patient organisations as well as medical professionals involved in organ transplantation have explained to me that they do not support the introduction of an opt-out system in Ireland. Organ donation is an extremely sensitive and emotionally difficult situation, especially for relatives of the donor. Irish people have a high tendency to be generous and altruistic at a time of personal loss and, as a result, Ireland has a relatively high level of organ donation, with about 20 donors per million of population, which is well above the European average. I am reviewing the case for opt-in and opt-out systems of consent, and I will make my decision known as part of the Human Tissue legislation, the Heads of which, I hope to publish as soon as possible. In either case, my objective is to help achieve the greatest possible number of successful organ transplants. 96 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Health Service Plan.

13. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has approved the Health Service Executive draft service plan for 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6749/10]

61. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Health and Children when the Health Service Executive national service plan will be approved and published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6887/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 61 together. I approved the HSE National Service Plan 2010 on 5 February. In approving the Plan, I highlighted to the HSE the need to deliver, at a minimum, the levels of service set out in the Plan as well as operating within the limits of its Voted allocation of €14.069bn. The Plan commits the HSE to delivering activity levels for 2010 which are broadly in line with 2009 levels. Notwithstanding the difficult financial environment, the Government has made available additional resources to assist the HSE in responding to priority demographic and other needs and to support ongoing reform of the public health services. Planned activity levels for primary community and continuing care services in 2010 are in line with 2009, with some growth in activity proposed in areas such as Fair Deal, home care packages and medical cards schemes. In relation to acute hospital services, the focus will be on reducing inpatient care activity levels through provision of more appropriate service responses, delivering a shift to care on a day case basis, where appropriate, and on performance improvements such as surgery on the day of admission and reducing inappropriate lengths of stay. There will be a particular focus on reducing the current variance across different hospitals for similar procedures. By reducing costs, and reforming the way services are provided, I am confident the HSE will maintain access to services and continue to improve health outcomes for the population. The Plan was laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas on 8 February and has been published on the HSE’s website. During 2010, the HSE will provide me with monthly performance reports on all aspects of progression of the Plan.

Hospital Services.

14. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to reform hospital laboratory services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6936/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Approximately 77 million laboratory tests are undertaken annually across 44 public hospitals. At present the annual cost of this service is approximately €470 million. The workload comprises both urgent and non-urgent tests and a significant proportion of the activity originates in the primary care setting. An external review of laboratory services was conducted for the HSE by Teamwork Management Services in 2007. The review highlighted limitations in the current organisation of laboratories, which have an impact on quality, turn around time and cost. In light of the review, the HSE announced plans last year to modernise laboratory services and to introduce significant efficiencies in the configuration and operation of these services. The HSE has already had significant engagement with stakeholders in progressing this initiative. Groups such as the Faculty of Pathology and the Medical Laboratory Scientists Association will have an ongoing input into the process. As part of this initiative, the HSE has commenced discussions with the National Development Finance Agency about the capital financing of a 97 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] small number of dedicated “cold” laboratories to process the large volumes of routine patient tests currently undertaken in hospital laboratories. This will include a robust analysis of the cold laboratory business model from a ‘Value for Money’ perspective. I am also pleased to say that some improvements in laboratory service have taken place since the completion of the review. The number of individual laboratory disciplines which have been accredited has increased significantly. In addition, some reconfiguration of laboratory services has been achieved by transferring work undertaken in a number of small laboratories to larger laboratories. This allows for a higher level of throughput. I want to acknowledge the important role of staff and other stakeholders in effecting these changes and the shared commitment of all to the objective of high quality, cost effective laboratory services.

Nursing Homes Support Scheme.

15. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Health and Children if her attention has been drawn to the fact that financial assessment required for some applicants in respect of the fair deal scheme is leading to many persons that are ready for discharge being forced to stay in acute hospitals while they await a decision; if she will give direction to addressing this problem so that beds will be freed up in acute hospitals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6978/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): The HSE is working with the acute hospitals and nursing homes to expedite the process of allowing individuals who have finished their acute phase of care to move to nursing home care where this is deemed appropriate. It is not necessary for the financial assessment to be completed before a person enters a nursing home. The HSE’s Guidelines on the Standardised Implemen- tation of the Nursing Homes Support Scheme state that, subject to overall resources, people who enter nursing homes after the commencement of the scheme will have their financial support paid either from the date that the application was made or from date of admission to the nursing home, whichever is the later. This means that a person who is being treated in an acute hospital and who is assessed as requiring long-term nursing home care can move into an approved nursing home while their financial assessment is being processed.

Proposed Legislation.

16. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to introduce risk equalisation legislation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6899/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Following the Supreme Court decision of July 2008, which found the Irish Risk Equalisation Scheme to be ultra vires,the Government decided to introduce an interim scheme of loss compensation. This was provided for under the Health Insurance (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, covering the period 2009 to early 2012. In any community rated health insurance market, a comprehensive risk equalisation or loss compensation system is required in order for the market to operate in the best interests of all consumers. Without a risk equalisation or loss compensation system, insuring older or ill people will be loss making. As a result, insurers that cover a higher proportion of older people will be at a significant competitive disadvantage and insurers will seek to avoid insuring older people. It follows that, without risk equalisation or loss compensation, competition will not function properly and the market will operate counter to the interests of ill and older people. This is why it is the international norm for risk equalisation or loss compensation to apply in community rated markets. 98 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

The Health Insurance Authority has started work on preparing a comprehensive risk equalisation scheme to replace the interim scheme of loss compensation when it expires. I intend to bring proposals in this regard to the Government before the end of March.

Accident and Emergency Services.

17. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on whether the situation in hospital accident and emergency departments constitutes a national emergency in view of the fact that the number of patients on trolleys and chairs reached 500 on 20 January 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6747/10]

22. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she will take to tackle the number of patients waiting on trolleys in accident and emergency, which was recorded by a union (details supplied) at an unprecedented height of 500 during January 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6870/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 17 and 22 together. A small number of Emergency Departments have been recording high numbers of patients waiting to be admitted to hospital in recent weeks. However, detailed sampling from 24 hospitals, which began in February last year, to the end of December indicate that 87% of all patients attending an ED were either discharged or admitted within the maximum target of 6 hours, and 94% of all patients who did not require an admission were discharged within this time. I don’t think that the “trolleycount” figures for patients awaiting admission are an adequate indicator of performance in EDs as they only record the waiting time from when a decision has been taken to admit. From the end of March, the HSE will record waiting time from when a patient arrives in the Emergency Department. This will be a far more meaningful record of patients’ experience in EDs. I have been monitoring the situation in Emergency Departments very closely. I met with the Chairperson, CEO and members of the HSE management team recently to review progress and to ensure that all possible steps are being taken to minimise the waiting time for patients awaiting admission. I asked the HSE to streamline the administrative processes for dealing with applications under the Fair Deal so that patients’ discharge to a suitable long-stay facility is not delayed unnecessarily. The HSE has put several actions in train including:

• Escalation plans to enable patients to be moved to wards,

• Additional ward rounds to take place daily to help earlier discharges from hospitals, and

• Ensuring access to additional diagnostic facilities such as imaging to allow earlier decisions about admission or discharge.

At my request, the HSE is also putting place a system of early warning measures so that corrective action is taken as soon as problems in a particular hospital are identified. Hospitals have also been instructed to ensure that all escalation measures are implemented and reviewed as necessary and that appropriate liaison arrangements with primary and community services are in place.

Health Services. 18. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has commissioned reports or studies to look at the long-term health consequences of the decision to 99 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Lucinda Creighton.] abolish the PRSI scheme for dental, optical and aural treatments; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6963/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): My Department has not commissioned any specific reports or studies to examine the long term health consequences, if any, of the decision by my colleague, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, to curtail entitlements under the Treatments Benefits Schemes.

Substance Misuse.

19. Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to introduce legislation to regulate head shops and the products sold within head shops; the timeframe for same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6894/10]

65. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Health and Children the legislation or regulation that is planned to address the danger to the public, especially young persons, of purchasing items from head shops; if such control will be fast tracked; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6985/10]

67. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on the recent spread of head shops here and the substances sold therein; the steps she will take by way of legislation and regulation to control this situation; and the measures she proposes to take. [6720/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions No. 19, 65 and 67 together. The Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 and its associated regulations control the import, export, production, supply and possession of a range of named narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances listed in the Schedules to the Act. Substances are scheduled under the Act in accordance with Ireland’s obligations under international conventions and/or where there is evidence that the substances are causing significant harm to public health in Ireland. The list of scheduled substances is kept under ongoing review. For example, in 2006 psychotropic (‘magic’) mush- rooms were banned and their possession and sale is now illegal. On 31 March 2009, BZP was similarly subjected to legislative control measures and criminal sanctions. In the light of the health risks associated with some of the products being sold in so-called ‘head shops’, I intend to have the regulations drafted this month which will introduce controls, similar to those introduced recently in the UK, on a range of substances which are currently on sale in head shops. In accordance with EU law, it may also be necessary to notify the Commission of the proposed regulations in case they impact on legitimate industrial activities and this imposes a 3 month stand still period on implementation of the regulations. These regulations will make the possession and sale of these substances illegal and subject to criminal sanctions. Some of the substances in question have legitimate uses — for example, in the production of plastics and industrial solvents. It will be necessary to assess the level of use of these substances by industry in Ireland and the implications for industry of placing these substances under the ambit of Misuse of Drugs legislation. Minister of State John Curran, who has responsibility for co-ordinating the National Drugs Strategy, has identified head shops as an area of concern, and is currently considering the options available to more effectively control the activities of head shops. A Research Advisory Group (RAG) has been established to identify possible options for the regulation of head shops. The RAG held its first meeting on 13 January 2010. It has 100 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers representatives from the National Advisory Committee on Drugs, the Departments of Com- munity, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Health and Children, the Health Research Board, Revenue Custom’s Service, the Forensic State Laboratory and other relevant stakeholders. The RAG will report incrementally until its work is complete.

Departmental Agencies.

20. Deputy Pádraic McCormack asked the Minister for Health and Children the recruitment of the next chief executive of the Health Service Executive; the number of candidates that have expressed interest in same; the time line for the interview process; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6919/10]

73. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Health and Children if the salary of the new chief executive in the Health Service Executive will be less than that paid to the current post holder; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6925/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 20 and 73 together. The Board of the Health Service Executive have begun the recruitment process for the next Chief Executive Officer of the HSE as the contract of the current CEO, Professor Brendan Drumm expires in August this year. In accordance with Section 17 of the Health Act 2004, the HSE Board is responsible for making the appointment. That Act stipulates that the recruitment process must be in accordance with the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004. In that context, I understand the recruitment process initiated by the Board is being conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice issued by the Commission for Public Service Appointments. Much of the information about this competitive process is, by its nature, confidential such as information about applicants and interviews and I cannot, therefore, supply the details sought by the Deputy. The intention is that the process will be complete in time for an orderly hand-over of responsibility. Public advertisements for the position were placed nationally and internationally in December 2009. As part of the recruitment process an executive search and recruitment company, Amrop Strategis, has been engaged by the Board following competitive tender to conduct an international search for the position. The rate of remuneration for the next CEO will fall to be determined once the recruitment process currently being conducted by the HSE Board is complete. The terms and conditions for the post, including salary, require the approval of the Minister for Health and Children and the consent of the Minister for Finance.

Hospital Services.

21. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to close 1,100 hospital beds in 2010; the location of these beds; her views on the impact this will have on patient services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6876/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I approved the HSE’s 2010 National Service Plan last Friday, 5 February. The Plan targets a reduction of 54,000 inpatient cases through a combination of reducing emergency admissions by over 33,000 and providing access to diagnostics on a non-inpatient basis to at least 10,000 patients who are admitted each year only for that purpose. It also targets a further increase in day cases. Meeting these targets will require increased access to the specialist skills and senior clinical decision- making available in Medical Assessment Units, to diagnostics and to other ambulatory care services. The HSE will also focus on minimising length of stay, with a particular focus on 101 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] reducing the current variance across different hospitals for similar procedures, on increasing same day of surgery admission and on protecting inpatient beds for elective surgery in order to reduce waiting times. While there is no proposal in the National Service Plan to close 1,100 beds, the reduction in in-patient treatments will mean that less capacity will be required in this area during 2010. By reforming the manner in which services are provided, I am confident that the HSE will deliver the volumes of service provided for in the plan, while at the same time continuing to improve service quality and patient outcomes. Accordingly, under the National Service Plan the acute sector will continue to manage emergency admissions while at the same time achieving elective activity targets.

Question No. 22 answered with Question No. 17.

Medical Training.

23. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Health and Children if there will be an increase in the number of general practitioners training places offered in 2010 in order to address the shortage of GP’s here; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6996/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): There is currently one model of GP training in Ireland, which is provided by the Irish College of General Practitioners (ICGP). This is a four year model, with 2 years based in hospital rotations and 2 years on an approved GP training programme. At present, there are 120 GP training places per year. The Health Service Executive (HSE) is pursuing a number of initiatives to increase the number of new general practitioners entering the Irish health service each year. This work, to date, has focused on a proposal to substantially increase the intake of GP trainees to a potential 160 places per annum commencing in July 2010. The Executive has reported to my Department that the following are the enabling steps in this process:

• Additional GP training places will be made available via a formal re-alignment of existing Non Consultant Hospital Doctor’s training posts to the ICGP training programme.

• An additional GP training programme is being implemented in Dublin North Inner City.

• Forty-five additional GP trainers will be appointed to expand the number of general practice placements on training programmes, with a particular emphasis on areas of deprivation and GP shortage.

• Training programmes will be restructured on a regional basis in line with the new HSE regional structures.

• The additional training places will be allocated as appropriate to meet the projected needs of the regions as informed by work force planning exercises.

Proposed Legislation. 24. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Health and Children when the Human Tissue Bill will be published; the further information she will put into the public arena in relation to the use of children’s organs without parental consent; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6982/10] 102 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I intend to bring a draft General Scheme of a Human Tissue Bill to Government as soon as possible for its approval. Subject to this approval, I will publish the General Scheme of the Human Tissue Bill. The purpose of the legislation is to meet the key recommendation of Dr. Deirdre Madden’s ‘Report on Post- Mortem Practice and Procedures’ that no post-mortem examination should be carried out and no tissue retained for any purpose whatsoever without authorisation and to address related issues. The scope of the legislation will include the removal, retention, storage, use and disposal of human tissue from deceased persons. Among other issues, Dr Madden’s report inquired into the policies and practices relating to the removal, retention and disposal of organs from children who have undergone post-mortem examination in the State since 1970. Dr Madden’s report was published in 2006 and it included her findings on policies and practices, together with a set of recommendations on the importance of legislation in this area. A subsequent report of a Working Group, also chaired by Dr Madden, on other areas of post-mortem practice and procedures was published in November 2006. In line with one of the recommendations in Dr Madden’s report, an independent audit of all retained organs in the State was carried out by Ms Michaela Willis and this report was published in 2009. The forthcoming human tissue legislation will address the issues arising from both of Dr. Madden’s reports. In light of the publication of both Dr Madden’s reports in 2006 and the Retained Organs Audit in 2009, I have no further information on the use of children’s organs without parental consent that can be put into the public arena.

Services for People with Disabilities.

25. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on whether, as a matter of policy, it is preferable that children with severe disabilities are looked after in the family home as opposed to an acute children’s ward of a hospital and that the average annual cost to the State of such home care provision is a fraction of the cost of hospital maintenance and that in this situation it also makes economic sense to support the services provided by such as a foundation (details supplied) which is facilitating such a policy. [6649/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): The HSE provided funding of €585,000 to the Jack and Jill Foundation in 2009 and will be happy to consider the report “There’s no Place like Home” as part of its engagement with the Found- ation this year. Neither my Department nor the HSE were involved in the preparation of this report. I agree that, in general, children’s needs are most appropriately met and provided in the home, and that we need to ensure more efficient use of resources. However, many children availing of services provided by the Jack and Jill Foundation also avail of other disability services, and the report did not compare the respective costs of the home based care provided by the Foundation with the cost of similar services provided by the HSE. The current economic and budgetary position means we can only continue to fund new services by reducing costs and greater efficiency, including achieving greater integration of services provided by the statutory and non-statutory sectors. I should mention in this context that my Department is undertaking a review of the efficiency and effectiveness of the health and personal services provided to people with disabilities. This review is part of the Govern- ment’s Value for Money and Policy Review programme. The review will focus, in particular, on the scope for achieving greater efficiency and effectiveness from the substantial resources expended on services for people with disabilities, and will support the future planning and development of such services. I can assure the Deputy that the issues raised in the Jack and Jill Report will be considered as part of that review. 103 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Primary Care Strategy.

26. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of primary care teams at advanced functioning stage at the end of January 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6745/10]

46. Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for Health and Children the process being used to set the rents that the Health Service Executive will be committed to paying in leasing arrangements undertaken as a result of the invitation to tender published in December 2007 and July 2008 for the provision of primary care centres for primary care teams. [6647/10]

54. Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of primary care teams that were established by the end of 2009; the number of such teams that are operating out of a multi-purpose building; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6977/10]

71. Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for Health and Children if the Health Service Executive sought expressions of interest in December 2007 and July 2008 for the provision of primary care centres for primary care teams; if the terms and conditions of the leasing arrangements stipulate that the HSE will only sign a lease with a landlord when general practitioner involvement in providing services from the primary care teams accommodated in the centre has been agreed; the optimum and minimum number of general practitioners per primary care centre, in view of the fact that the primary care strategy makes it clear that the presence of general practitioners is critical to the entire concept of the primary care centres; and the ration- ale used by the HSE in determining these figures. [6648/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 26, 46, 54 and 71 together. As these are service matters they have been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputies.

Medicinal Products.

27. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has had discussions with a view to reducing the price of generic medicines; if she expects such price reductions to follow on from the reduction in price of many branded items; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6970/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I have had discussions with the two representative bodies of drugs manufacturers — the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA) and the Association of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers in Ireland (APMI) — with a view to securing significant savings in the State’s drug bill. Agreement has been reached with IPHA on price cuts of 40% for a large number of drugs and medicines with effect from 1 February. In addition, the rebate paid by IPHA member companies to the Health Service Executive in respect of drugs supplied under the GMS scheme has been extended to include all community drugs schemes and increased from 3.53% to 4%. The combination of these measures plus consequent savings in wholesale and retail mark-ups are expected to result in savings of approximately €94m in a full year. I am disappointed to say that APMI member companies have declined at this stage to offer any reductions in the price of the generic drugs and medicines that they supply at this time. The current agreement with APMI expires in September 2010 and it is my firm intention to obtain savings from APMI of at least an equivalent level to those secured from IPHA. 104 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Nursing Homes Support Scheme.

28. Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of applications for the fair deal scheme; the number of applications approved for the scheme; the number of applications awaiting approval for the scheme; the average time to approve an applicant; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6912/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply.

Medical Cards.

29. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Health and Children the average time it takes to process medical card applications in the centralised service; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6943/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I wrote to all Oireachtas members on 19th January 2010, outlining a range of measures being employed by the Health Service Executive (HSE) to address issues arising from the centralising of the medical card application and review process to the Primary Care Reimbursement Service in Dublin, and I also referred to the various enhancements that this process will facilitate upon completion. As the information sought by the Deputy is not provided by the HSE to my Department as a matter of routine, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to address this matter and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Question No. 30 answered with Question No. 12.

Pharmacy Services.

31. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Health and Children if pharmacists will be reimbursed for the full cost of drugs purchased prior to 1 February 2010 when the new lower rates were introduced; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6880/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Minister for Finance announced in the Budget in early December last that there would be savings in the price of drugs and medicines. I and my officials also discussed the matter with the Irish Pharmacy Union (IPU) and the IPU were fully aware of the impending price cuts. In fact, the price cuts were delayed from 1 January until 1 February to allow, at the request of the IPU, pharmacists to apply stock control measures in advance of impending cuts. I have been advised by the manufacturers and wholesalers that the community pharmacy sector had run down stocks in advance of price cuts. As all parties have been previously advised, pharmacists will be reimbursed by the Health Service Executive from 1 February using the new rates.

Long-Term Illness Scheme.

32. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Health and Children when the long-term illness scheme will be reviewed, including consideration of other appropriate illnesses being added to the list; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6991/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Long Term Illness Scheme (LTI) was introduced in 1971 under Section 59(3) of the Health Act 1970. It provides that a health board (now the HSE) may make arrangements for the supply without charge of drugs, medicines or medical and surgical appliances to persons suffering from a prescribed disease or disability of a permanent or long-term nature. The conditions which have been prescribed are: 105 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] mental handicap, mental illness (for people under 16 only), phenylketonuria, cystic fibrosis, spina bifida, hydrocephalus, diabetes mellitus, diabetes insipidus, haemophilia, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophies, parkinsonism, conditions arising from thalidomide and acute leukaemia. There are no plans to extend the list of eligible conditions.

Voluntary Sector Funding.

33. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Health and Children the decision that has been made regarding the application of pay reductions to public servants to persons that work for voluntary and community organisations funded under the Health Act, if it is the case that these organisations have had their allocations reduced with the instruction that they should cut the pay of their employees on a pro rata basis to the public service; if legal advice has been sought in this regard; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6971/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Government’s decision to reduce its payroll costs in various ways — principally by reducing the salaries paid to public servants and reducing the numbers employed — was deliberately designed to protect existing levels of public services and to provide a more sustainable payroll cost base into the future. I understand that the HSE issued an early warning notice to its grant aided voluntary agencies anticipating (incorrectly) that the pay reduction for public servants under the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No 2) Act 2009 would automatically apply to the agencies. In fact, grant aided agencies (funded under Section 39 of the Health Act 2004) are not directly affected by the pay adjustments provided for under the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No 2) Act 2009. Section 39 agencies are not public service bodies as defined in that Act and their employees are not public servants. However, the grant funding of Section 39 Agencies is subject to the general efficiency savings for the health sector provided for in the Budget. Accordingly, it is entirely appropriate that Section 39 Agencies and other HSE funded voluntary providers take appropriate measures to ensure that they continue to provide the same level of service in 2010 as previously, notwithstanding the reductions in their funding. It is the responsibility of each individual employer to decide exactly what mix of actions should be taken to achieve this goal, to take appropriate legal and other advice, to consult and inform its employees/trade unions as necessary and to manage the HR and industrial relations implications of its decisions. I further understand that the HSE is in the process of confirming this position to the bodies concerned on foot of clarification in the matter from my Department. Budget 2010 requires the HSE to generate non-pay savings of €394m, €106m of which is to be met through economies. It is a matter for the HSE to determine how these non-pay savings are to be met, but it is likely that grant-funded agencies will bear some proportion of the savings.

National Treatment Purchase Fund.

34. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Health and Children if the National Treat- ment Purchase Fund limits the number of procedures it undertakes on behalf of individual hospitals; if so, the reason for same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6984/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The primary objective of the National Treatment Purchase Fund is to secure treatment for public patients who have been waiting longest for treatment. The Fund receives an annual financial allocation within which it must operate. In the current year this amounts to €90.092m. The volume and overall mix of 106 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers activity to be undertaken each year is agreed between the Fund and my Department, having regard to overall service priorities and the amount of the financial allocation for the year. A number of factors influence the volumes of patients accepted from individual public hospitals’ waiting lists. These include the Fund’s overall budget and the level of activity agreed under its annual service plan, the nature and location of cases involving persons waiting longest for treatment, the capacity for certain types of surgery in the private system, the complexity and cost of any individual case and also how waiting lists are managed in each public hospital. The position in relation to the numbers from any particular hospital who can be afforded treatment is kept under review in the course of the year, having regard to the objective of arranging treatment, within budget, for as many as possible of those waiting longest for treatment. The NTPF is responsible for seeking the best value for money possible for taxpayers. Accord- ingly, it negotiates with individual service providers for different types of treatment. Where a provider’s price is deemed unreasonable, the Fund will not purchase that treatment from the provider. As a result of this policy, as well as the increase in private acute capacity in the state, the NTPF has been able to negotiate better prices, in particular for larger volume treatments.

Child Protection Services.

35. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Health and Children if the review of Services for Children and Families 2008 published by the Health Service Executive discloses a failure by the State to properly protect children at risk; her views on whether it is acceptable that of 24,668 reports regarding children at risk, only 15,364 resulted in an initial assessment; and the action she is taking to ensure all reports are properly investigated and assessed. [6948/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): All reports to the HSE’s Child Protection Services are screened by child care professionals. Based on this, some cases are dealt with immediately and closed without the need for formal assessment, some are referred on to other services or agencies and some are deemed to require an initial assessment. In order to further develop its Child Welfare and Protection Services an amount of some €14m has been provided to the HSE in the current year to progress the implementation of the recommendations of the Ryan Commission. Included in the Govern- ment’s Implementation Plan is a commitment to fill up to 270 vacant social work posts over the period 2009-2011. The filling of these posts commenced in 2009 and will continue throughout 2010. This initiative is being targeted at the area of child protection and children in care.

Assisted Human Reproduction.

36. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to publish legislation on assisted human reproduction; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6987/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Supreme Court recently decided in the RvR (frozen embryos)case that the frozen embryos at issue in the case do not have the constitutional protection of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution. It is my intention to bring forward proposals to Government later this year with a view to drafting legislation to govern the area of Assisted Human Reproduction and related practices. The work involved in developing these proposals will examine and consider — among other things — the issues arising from the frozen embryos Supreme Court judgment.

107 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Hospitals Building Programme.

37. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children the decisions that have been made regarding the construction of a new Central Mental Hospital; if funding is available for this purpose; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6993/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): It had been intended to locate the new Central Mental Hospital (CMH) at Thornton Hall, Co. Dublin; however it has been ascertained that the site proposed for the development of the new hospital is not large enough to accommodate an Intellectual Disability Forensic Mental Health Unit and a Child and Adolescent Forensic Mental Health unit, the need for which has been identified by the HSE. The question of the relocation of the CMH to an alternative site is currently under consideration. In the context of discussions regarding the Capital Programme for Budget 2010 it was agreed that alternative financing models would be explored for the development of the new CMH.

38. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Health and Children the reports she has received regarding the co-located private hospitals that have received planning permission and their intentions to proceed to construction; if her Department or the Department of Finance has completed cost benefit analysis on proceeding with these hospitals at this stage; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6980/10]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Renewed Programme for Government re-affirms the Government’s commitment to the current co-location programme. Preferred bidders have been selected for six co-located projects at Beaumont, Cork University, Limerick Regional, St James’s, Sligo and Waterford Regional Hospitals. Project agreements have been signed for the Beaumont, Cork, Limerick and St James’s projects. Planning permission has been granted for these latter four projects. The co-location programme is a complex public procurement process. It is a matter for each successful bidder to arrange its finance under the terms of the relevant Project Agreement. The co-location initiative, like other major projects, has to deal with the changed funding environment. The HSE is continuing to work with the successful bidders to provide whatever assistance it can to help them advance the projects. The HSE is required to undertake a rigorous value for money assessment of each co-location project. Projects, in order to proceed, must meet a rigorous value for money test which accords with a Public Sector Benchmark. This test is then verified by the National Development Fin- ance Agency (NDFA) which acts as advisor to the Department of Health and Children. The HSE and NDFA have confirmed that the tenders received for the six projects where preferred bidders have been selected accorded with the Public Sector Benchmark. As they proceed the projects must continue to demonstrate value for money.

Vaccination Programme.

39. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Health and Children the cost to the State of the H1N1 vaccination programme; the amount of vaccine that was surplus to requirements; the amount that was returned to the provider or sold on to other countries; if an inventory has been completed on stocks of the vaccine that are in the possession of general practitioners that will not be required; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6968/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The HSE had contracts in place for the provision of pandemic vaccine with Baxter for 4.25million doses and GSK for 3.45 million doses. Baxter has supplied a total of 619,200 doses and the HSE terminated this contract 108 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers in December 2009. GSK has supplied 2.35 million doses and the HSE is currently in discussion with GSK regarding possible options for dealing with the balance. No pandemic vaccine has been returned to the provider or sold on to another country. As the pandemic vaccination campaign is still ongoing and GPs have been asked to use any remaining stocks for vaccination of the general population, details of remaining and distributed stock will not be available until after the completion of the campaign. The possible need for a stockpile of vaccine to be available in the event of a further wave will also need to be addressed. The overall costs of the vaccination programme will not be available until the vaccination campaign is finished.

Health Service Staff.

40. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Health and Children the progress that has been made in addressing the inadequate number of social workers in the health service; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6981/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Under the employment control framework for the health sector, social workers are among the grades specifically exempted from the general moratorium on recruitment and promotions. This means that vacancies arising in the exempted grades, including social worker posts, may continue to be filled. The framework also provides for an increase in the number of social workers posts within the overall approved employment ceiling, in line with Government policy, in order to meet the requirements of integrated care delivery and primary care needs particularly in respect of children at risk, the elderly and those with disabilities. The Implementation Plan for the recommendations of the Report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse was accepted by Government and published in July 2009. The Government has announced the provision of €15 million in 2010 for the implementation of recommendations contained in the report, including the recruitment of a significant number of additional social workers. A further key action of the Implementation Plan which is currently being implemented is the conversion of temporary social work posts to permanent posts to address issues of continuity of care and staff retention within the child welfare and protection services.

Nursing Homes Repayment Scheme.

41. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children if, in relation to the payment of funds into patient private property accounts under the provisions of the Health (Repayment Scheme) Act 2006, consideration was given to notifying family members, in particular parents, of persons who were deemed to not have adequate mental capacity; if same were in fact notified, regarding their right to apply to the judge of the Circuit Court to have the payment made elsewhere; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6862/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Under the Health (Repayment Scheme) Act 2006, a relevant person or a connected person as defined in the Act was entitled to apply for a repayment under the scheme. A relevant person is a person who was charged and paid recoverable health charges. A connected person includes the following:

(a) a person who has been nominated in writing by the relevant person

(b) the Registrar of Wards of Court if the relevant person is a ward of court,

(d) a next friend appointed by a court, 109 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.]

(e) the HSE if none of the aforementionedis applicable to the relevant person, and the relevant person is unable to make an application due to a physical or mental disability or ill-health,

(f) a living spouse or living child of the relevant person who has paid recoverable health charges on behalf of the relevant person.

In regard to patients in the care of the HSE who were deemed by a medical practitioner not to have sufficient mental capacity to understand the scheme and for whom there was no other connected person as mentioned earlier, the HSE made application to the Scheme Adminis- trator for a repayment on their behalf. As provided for in the legislation, all such payments made in respect of HSE applications were lodged to the patient’s own private property account. The legislation also provides that an application may be made to a judge of the Circuit Court for the repayment to be made otherwise than to the patient’s private property account. Where monies have been lodged to the patient’s private property account the HSE ensures that this money is used only for the benefit of the patient. Where monies are required for the benefit of the patient, contact should be made with the relevant care centre for access to the funds. During the lifetime of the scheme, it was the HSE’s policy to advise and discuss with family members, claims that were made by the HSE on behalf of the patient. In addition, Section 9(2) of the Health (Repayment Scheme) Act 2006 provides that the account holder or a next friend appointed by a court may direct the HSE (a) not to invest money held in the account on behalf of the account holder and (b) not to use money in the account for the patient’s benefit.

Medical Cards.

42. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children if her attention has been drawn to the difficulties being encountered by persons in accessing information and having their applications processed through the centralised medical card system; if she will recon- sider the plan to fully centralise the system in 2010 in view of the difficulties encountered; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6965/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I fully support the Health Service Executive’s decision to centralise the processing of all medical card applications and reviews. I wrote to all Oireachtas members on 19th January 2010 outlining a range of measures being employed by the Executive to address issues arising from this initiative and I also referred to the various enhancements that this process will facilitate upon completion.

Pharmacy Services.

43. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount of savings there will be as a result of the reduction in the price of branded medicines announced in February 2010; the steps she is taking to ensure that persons that have to pay for their medicines over the counter benefit from the price reductions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6969/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I have had discussions with the two representative bodies of drugs manufacturers — the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA) and the Association of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers in Ireland (AMPI) — with a view to securing significant savings in the State’s drug bill. Agreement has been reached with IPHA on price cuts of 40% for a large number of drugs and medicines with effect from 1 February. In addition, the rebate paid by IPHA member companies to the Health 110 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Service Executive (HSE) in respect of drugs supplied under the GMS scheme has been extended to include all community drugs schemes and increased from 3.53% to 4%. The combination of these measures plus consequent savings in wholesale and retail mark-ups are expected to result in savings of approximately €94m in a full year. I am disappointed to say that APMI member companies have declined at this stage to offer any reductions in the price of the generic drugs and medicines that they supply at this time. The current agreement with APMI expires in September 2010 and it is my firm intention to obtain savings from APMI of at least an equivalent level to those secured from IPHA. The Health Professional (Reduction Of Payments To Community Pharmacy Contractors) Regu- lations 2009 sets out the fees and margins for dispensing under the GMS and Drugs Payment Scheme (DPS). In addition, the relevant agreements with manufacturers set out the ex-factory price of products. Any person availing of the DPS should therefore see a reduction in the price to them of the relevant medicines which were subject to price cuts on 1 February.

Hospital Services.

44. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will ensure the provision of resources to allow the reopening of the 25 bed St Joseph’s ward at Our Lady’s Hospital for Sick Children, Crumlin, Dublin; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6748/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Each hospital funded by the HSE is required to deliver services within the financial allocation provided. In common with all hospitals, Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Crumlin is faced with the challenge of delivering a high quality service to its patients, while remaining within budget. The priority of the HSE and hospital management at Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital is to ensure that services at the hospital are maintained at an optimum level and to protect patient care. The HSE is involved in ongoing discussions with hospital management regarding its 2010 financial allocation and Service Plan and the exact services to be provided in the hospital during the year will be addressed in this context. The HSE is pursuing ways in which services across the three Dublin paediatric hospitals can best be coordinated, to avoid unnecessary duplication and to achieve savings that can be put back into patient care. A Paediatric Hospitals Operations Group has now been established for ongoing network management and enhanced integration of the three paediatric hospitals in advance of the transfer to the new paediatric hospital.

Cancer Screening Programme.

45. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will provide details of the roll-out of the national colorectal screening programme; when screening will commence; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6916/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I am pleased to confirm the establishment of a national colorectal cancer screening programme. Work has already begun to put the programme in place. This programme will initially be offered to men and women aged between 60 and 69 years. Screening will commence in early 2012 following an intensive period of preparation. About 50% of colorectal cancers in the 55-74 age group occur in people aged 60-69 years. The programme will be extended to all those in the 55-74 year age group as logistics and resources allow. Colorectal cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among both men and women in Ireland. Approximately 2,200 new cases are diagnosed and around 1,000 people die 111 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] from the disease each year. A successful national colorectal cancer screening programme has the potential to significantly reduce mortality from this cancer. Colorectal screening works on two fronts: it provides early detection and therefore earlier and more effective treatment, and it helps to prevent cancer in the first place by detecting pre-cancerous growths such as polyps. The programme will be provided by the National Cancer Screening Service (NCSS). There will be a two year pre-implementation phase beginning 1 January, 2010, which will be used to build colonoscopy capacity, including training of Advanced Nurse Practitioners. There are estimated to be just over 400,000 people in the initial target age group (60 to 69 years). Half of these will be invited for screening each year. Based on expected uptake rates and incidence rates, it is expected that around 6,000 colonoscopies would take place each year within the screening programme. Currently, around 59,000 colonoscopies are performed in the public healthcare system annually. The Irish Cancer Society has generously offered to contribute €1million towards the screening programme. When the various dimensions of the programme are identified the Department will revert to the Society to discuss possible uses for this money. I am glad that this important programme will now proceed.

Question No. 46 answered with Question No. 26.

Proposed Legislation.

47. Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for Health and Children when the legislation which will statutorily establish eligibility for health and social services will be published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6976/10]

58. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Health and Children when legislation will be published to clarify eligibility for health and personal social services; the reason for the long delay in publishing this legislation; the number of persons concerned in the drafting of the legislation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6750/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to takes Questions Nos. 47 and 58 together. As the Deputy will be aware, the current legislation for health and personal social services has been in place for many years and there is a need now to have a clear set of statutory provisions that ensure equity and transparency and to bring the system up to date with developments in service delivery and technology that have occurred since the Health Act 1970. Accordingly, work is underway in the Department on a new legislative framework to provide for clear statutory provisions on eligibility and entitlement for health and personal social services. The legislation will define specific health and personal social services more clearly; set out who should be eligible for what services, as well as criteria for eligibility; establish when and in what circumstances charges may be made and provide for an appeals framework. As the Deputy will appreciate, this is a very complex undertaking as the current legislation has been in place since 1970, and there have been significant developments in services since then, with a growing emphasis on delivery of care in a community rather than institutional setting. Currently, there are 0.5 W.T.E. PO, HEO and Co. posts as well as one W.T.E. AP post dedicated to this process.

Departmental Agencies.

48. Deputy John Perry asked the Minister for Health and Children the steps the Health 112 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Service Executive will take to set up its own law office while at the same time outsourcing its legal service needs; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6940/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Question No. 49 answered with Question No. 10.

Mental Health Services.

50. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of adult health community teams that have been established; the progress that she expects for 2010 to increase this number in accordance with policy in A Vision for Change; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6989/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): As this is a service matter the question has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Hospital Services.

51. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will confirm that installation of the new CT scanner at Monaghan General Hospital will commence in the week beginning 15 February 2010; if she will ensure that the required trained personnel will be in place to operate the facility without delay; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6746/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Youth Services.

52. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to review the operation of the Youth Work Act and the national youth work development plan; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6861/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): A priority for my Office is to ensure the enhanced integration and coordination of constituent units responsible for youth work and youth related policies with a view to developing a new strategic framework for youth related services under my remit. With regard to the Youth Work Act, 2001 and the National Youth Work Development Plan, the recommendations of the National Youth Work Advisory Committee in this regard are under consideration at present having regard to the role of my Office, its policies and strategies and developments to date.

Health Insurance.

53. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will fulfil her legal obligation to bring the VHI within the remit of the Financial Regulator by the end of March 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6898/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Government have been clear in our view that the VHI should achieve authorisation on a level playing field with other insurers. A stable, community-rated health insurance market, supported by a robust risk equalisation system, will be achieved in circumstances where all the players in the market are author- ised and regulated on a level playing field. The capital position of the VHI presently, and the 113 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] prospects for its reserves over the medium term, are some of the key factors in the decision of the Financial Regulator to grant authorisation. Clearly, the reserve position of the VHI is influenced by the measures in place currently, and in prospect for the future, whereby the costs of claims for older people are supported by younger insured persons. There are a great many inter-related factors involved in setting out the roadmap now to a stable, community-rated health insurance market, all of which are under consideration by the Government. I have raised the full issues relating to the private health insurance market with Government and I expect that decisions will be made in the first quarter of this year.

Question No. 54 answered with Question No. 26.

Health Service Staff.

55. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of new consultants appointed within the public health care system in 2009; the number in each of the categories designated under the consultant contract agreement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6986/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Question No. 56 answered with Question No. 10.

Medical Cards.

57. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of persons who qualified for a full medical card on 31 December 2008; the number of persons who qualified for such a card on 31 December 2009; the extra cost to the State of the increase; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6974/10]

60. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of persons who qualified for a doctor only medical card on 31 December 2008; the number of persons who qualified for such a card on 31 December 2009; the extra cost to the state of the increase; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6975/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 57 and 60 together. The Health Service Executive has reported to my Department that there were 1,352,120 and 1,478,560 medical card holders on 31St December 2008 and on 31St December 2009, respectively. This represents an increase of 126,440 medical card holders over that period. The Execu- tive has also reported that there were 85,546 and 98,325 GP visit card holders on 31St December 2008 and on 31St December 2009, respectively. This represents an increase of 12,779 GPs visit card holders over the same period. There are two main cost factors associated with medical cards and GP visit cards, firstly the capitation and other payments made to General Practitioners (GPs) and, secondly, the cost of drugs supplied to patients. GPs who hold contracts under the General Medical Services (GMS) Scheme with the Health Service Executive (HSE) are remunerated through a range of fees and payments, most of which were amended in the Health Professionals (Reduction of Payments to General Practitioners) Regulations 2009, which came into effect on 7th July last Included among these fees are more than 50 different capitation fees. The fees vary depending on the age and gender of the patient and the distance he or she lives from the GP’s surgery. For 114 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers example, fees currently range from €76.98 for a male patient under 5 years living 3 miles or less from the GP’s surgery to €218.37 for a female aged 65-70 years living more than 10 miles from the surgery. In addition, there are special capitation rates of €280.31 for persons over 70 residing at home and €896.07 for persons over 70 residing in private nursing homes. There are also a range of additional payments; for example, in respect of out of hours consultations, temporary residents, special items of services (e.g. suturing), panel size, practice support allowances and locum expenses. As regards the supply of drugs and medicines, medical card holders receive these free of charge while GP visit card holders avail of the Drugs Payment Scheme, which now involves a co-payment of the first €120 spent per family in any calendar month. Drugs costs vary significantly depending on the patient’s medical condition. Estimated total expenditure in 2009 on the GMS Scheme (medical cards and GP visit cards) was approximately €1.9 billion and in 2008 the HSE expenditure on this scheme was nearly €1.786 billion.

Question No. 58 answered with Question No. 47.

Hospital Services.

59. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Health and Children if there is resolution to the problem of reclaiming funds for public hospitals in relation to beds designated for public patients being used privately; if there is an issue of a high proportion of the beds designated for private patients in public hospitals being used for elective procedures as opposed to accident and emergency admissions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6979/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Government’s policy is to achieve fair access by patients to publicly-funded hospital capacity based on clinical need. While patients may be treated in public hospitals on a private basis, the primary role of the public hospital system is to provide services for public patients. All persons ordinarily resident in Ireland have full eligibility for hospital services, meaning that there is universal access to public hospital care. The fact that a person may have private health insurance does not take away from his/her eligibility for services as a public patient. Care is needed to ensure that a perceived need to generate income does not operate to the detriment of service provision to public patients. The primary objective must be to ensure that the level of private practice within public hospitals does not exceed the permitted ratio and, subject to that being achieved, to recover whatever income is due in respect of that level of private practice. The new consultants’ contract includes new measures designed to improve the management and control of public-private mix in hospitals — for example, through the operation of one- for-all outpatient and ambulatory diagnostic clinics, a key entry point to hospital care. There are also clear new rules on the operation of consultants’ public-private mix and the newly appointed clinical directors have a key role in this regard. These contractual features com- plement existing bed designation rules. Bed designation was introduced as part of the mechanism to control the level of private activity in publicly funded hospitals and to help ensure equitable access for public patients. Under the Health (In-Patient) Regulations 1991, beds in public hospitals are categorised as public, private or non-designated. Under these Regulations no private patient being admitted electively may be accommodated in a designated public bed. Similarly no private patient admitted as an emergency may be accommodated in a designated public bed unless (and only for such time as) a designated private bed is not available. The Regulations contain reciprocal provisions regarding the accommodation of public patients in beds designated as private. Taken 115 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] together these measures will improve the management of public-private mix and support the achievement of Government policy on fair access for public patients. With the support of my Department, the HSE is working to improve business processes for collecting outstanding debts due from private health insurers in respect of patients using private facilities in public hospitals. The VHI agreed to make a payment to the HSE of €50m towards outstanding debts. This payment was made in December 2009. This was in response to an initiative that I undertook to enable the HSE to implement its National Service Plan for 2009. The HSE has also drawn up proposals for centralising the management of patient debts and other income. I have asked the HSE to respond to the Deputy in relation to the detailed matter raised in relation to admissions to private beds.

Question No. 60 answered with Question No. 57.

Question No. 61 answered with Question No. 13.

Health Insurance.

62. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children the cost of health insurance over each of the past seven years and to date in 2010; the degree to which competition in the market has assisted the consumer; the extent to which community rating or regulation has resulted in economic efficiencies and or benefits to the consumer; the degree to which health insurance costs relate to the public and private hospital sectors; the extent to which the various health insurers have catered for or continue to cater for the various age groups and profiles; the extent to which it has become obvious as to the contributory causes to rising health insurance costs; the most obvious contributory factors; her plans to deal with the issues arising; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6835/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Each private health insurer offers a wide range of different policies and plans. There are about 184 different health insurance plans now on the market with different prices reflecting different costs incurred under these plans. Plans are also constantly evolving to meet different market conditions. Health insurance prices can be affected by a range of economic considerations including the costs of health care services and other costs and may also reflect the age profile of the customers in any insurer’s customer base. In addition, each private health insurance provider is free to choose their own service providers and price negotiations are a matter between each insurer and their chosen service providers. As Minister for Health and Children, I have no role to play in the day to day running of and commercial decisions relating to private health insurers. In addition, I have no role to play in the setting of prices by any of the private health insurance providers. This is a commercial decision for each insurer. The private health insurance market in Ireland operates under the principles of community rating (whereby all persons pay the same price for the same product, irrespective of age or health status), open enrolment (whereby no individual can be refused private health insurance by virtue of age or health status) and intergenerational solidarity (whereby in order to support the principal of community rating, younger people generally pay more for their cover in relation to market average cost, so that cover for older persons and those with ill health is not priced in relation to the risk they pose over the market average cost). Following the decision of the Supreme Court in 2008 that the Irish risk equalisation scheme was ultra vires, measures needed to be put in place to ensure that the principle of community rating was supported. The interim scheme provided for in the Health Insurance (Miscellaneous 116 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Provisions) Act 2009 consists of an age-related tax relief which is funded by a levy placed on the private health insurance companies. The Government’s clear policy objective is that health insurance should remain affordable to a large number of people, particularly to older people and people suffering ill health. To this end, community rating must be the cornerstone of the Irish health insurance market. The viability of the system relies on the effective operation of solidarity between different generations through which the young subsidise the healthcare costs of the elderly and are subsidised in their turn by the following generation. Health insurance should not be risk-rated for increasing age, medical status or claims history. It is therefore clear that this policy has made private health insurance reasonably affordable for older people and people with ill health. In a risk- rated market this would not be the case. Sustaining community rating requires a legally and financially robust system of risk equalisation to ensure cross-subsidisation across the entire market, not just within each company’s cohort of customers or among the holders of each health insurance contract. Work is now underway to replace the temporary levy and tax relief arrangement with such a robust system of risk equalisation. The reasons for increased health insurance costs include new technologies, additional hospital capacity and demographic change. The vast majority of costs incurred by insurers are in the hospital sector. With regard to the extent to which insurers have catered for or continue to cater for the various age groups and profiles, there are a number of issues which have been underpinned by legislation. Firstly, the principle of open enrolment ensures that no individual can be refused private health insurance. The principle of community rating ensures that no individual can be charged more than another for the same product due to their age or health status. The Health Insurance Acts also provide for the introduction of new regulations which will incentivise younger people to take out private health insurance early in life. These Lifetime Community Rating regulations are now in preparation and will be in place by mid-2010. Existing private health insurance legislation, the interim scheme which is currently in place and the Govern- ment’s commitment to put in place a robust risk equalisation scheme seek to mitigate againSt disincentives for insurers to provide private health insurance to older people and those with ill health. The principal objective of the Health Insurance Acts 1994 — 2009 aims to protect community rating and to ensure that private health insurers do not engage in product design which has the effect of excluding particular cohorts of customers. The Health Insurance Authority (HIA) monitors such issues and it is clear that without a robust risk equalisation scheme there will always be incentives for insurers to find ways of segmenting the market. The Government is fully committed to the implementation of such a robust scheme. I have raised the full issues relating to the private health insurance market with the Government and I expect that decisions will be made in the first quarter of this year.

Dental Treatment Services.

63. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Health and Children the way the cap on the dental treatment services scheme will operate; if its implementation will mean that medical card holders that need dental treatment towards the end of the year may not be given it free of charge; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6972/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): It has been decided to put a cash limit on the Dental Treatment Services Scheme this year, based on the expenditure incurred under the scheme in 2008. My Department has asked the Health Service Executive to examine the means of achieving this and I expect to receive their proposals shortly. 117 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Social Welfare Benefits.

64. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Health and Children the additional supports given to community welfare officers to deal with the increased demand for access to support; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [1730/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Question No. 65 answered with Question No. 19.

Health Services.

66. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Health and Children the progress made in providing isolation facilities and other appropriate services for people with cystic fibrosis; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6994/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I have consistently emphasised the need to improve facilities and services to persons with cystic fibrosis. Following publication of the Pollock Report in 2005, the Health Service Executive established a Working Group to undertake a detailed review of cystic fibrosis services. The Group, which was multi-disciplinary in its composition and included representation from the Department of Health and Children, was asked to review the current configuration and delivery of services to persons with cystic fibrosis in Ireland. The report was published in October 2009. Many of its recommendations had already been implemented. Some 50 additional staff including consultant, nursing and allied health professionals, have been appointed across the hospital system in recent years to enhance the level of services provided for persons with cystic fibrosis. The HSE was asked to place a particular focus on the development of services at the National Adult Tertiary Referral Centre at St Vincent’s Hospital. The hospital currently treats over 50% of the CF adult population. A number of capital projects have been completed at the hospital and have helped to improve facilities. These include a new ambulatory care centre, the refurbishment of St Camillus Ward, and a new Emergency Department which includes single room accommodation. The refurbishment of accommodation to provide eight single en-suite rooms for patients with cystic fibrosis was completed in August 2008 and the beds are now operational. This brings the total level of in-patient accommodation for the treatment of respiratory patients (including people with CF) at the hospital to 63 beds. A new ward block to replace existing accommodation is being developed at the hospital. This facility will provide single room en-suite inpatient accommodation (100 rooms) and a dedicated day unit for people with CF, including 10 single day treatment rooms with en-suite sanitary facilities. Tenders for this development are currently under consideration. It is estimated that the construction, equipping and commissioning of this block will take approximately 18 months. It is intended that the development will become operational as early as possible in 2011. The new facility will include accommodation for cystic fibrosis patients with appropriate isolation facilities for the treatment of their condition. The HSE is now working with St Vincent’s to identify opportunities for patients who do not require tertiary level care to be treated close to home where adult services have been developed in the other specialist centres. A number of other significant capital developments are being progressed for cystic fibrosis patients throughout the country, including in Beaumont Hospital. Capital funding has been provided for the development of outpatient facilities for patients with CF treated at Beaumont Hospital. The project is in two phases and the first phase (decanting) was completed at the end 118 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers of 2009. The second phase is due for completion in the second quarter of 2010. HSE funding enabled the construction of a three storey building consisting of two floors each of 14 single rooms, and 8 bed HDU and two additional ICU rooms (within existing ICU). Services for patients with cystic fibrosis are also provided at Our Lady’s Hospital, Crumlin, Children’s University Hospital, Temple Street, Tallaght Hospital, Cork University Hospital, Waterford Regional Hospital, Mid Western Regional Hospital, Limerick, University College Hospital Galway and Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda. The Cystic Fibrosis Registry of Ireland (CFRI) receives support funding from the HSE. Ireland is the only European country to commit public funding to a CF registry. The CFRI is now in a position to produce relevant data on 90% of people with CF in Ireland. The average enrolment of people with CF in other country registries is approximately 80%. The Newborn Screening for Cystic Fibrosis Steering Group was established in June 2009 under the Chairman- ship of Professor Gerry Loftus, Professor of Paediatrics, Galway. This group has a broad membership from key stakeholders and experts in the field of cystic fibrosis. The screening programme will commence implementation in 2010 provided all the necessary general and specific screening programme governance arrangements are in place. The Cystic Fibrosis Association of Ireland has made representations to the HSE in respect of people with Cystic Fibrosis living in Donegal for whom attendance at the CF centre in Belfast might be more convenient. The HSE is pursuing this through Co-operation and Work- ing Together (CAWT). I am conscious that further improvements are required, including the need to develop community outreach services to facilitate the treatment of patients outside of a hospital setting where appropriate. Taken together, the planned developments represent a tangible improvement in the quality of services for people with cystic fibrosis.

Question No. 67 answered with Question No. 19.

Hospital Services.

68. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of delayed discharge patients in hospitals at the end of 2009 as compared to the end of 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6751/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Information received from the Health Service Executive indicates that the number of patients whose discharge was delayed at the end of 2007 was 611 and at the end of 2009 it was 733. The National Code of Practice for Integrated Discharge Planning which was introduced last year, will be accompanied by significant changes to internal hospitals processes, work practices and behaviours. Those changes will involve the role of nursing in supporting more efficient processes at ward and overall bed management level and improving patient flow in, through and out of the hospital system. The Code also requires changes in clinical practice in terms of ward rounds, 7 day discharging, delegation of duties e.g. discharging, improving access to senior clinicians, improved tracking and follow up of tests and procedures and improving communication- between teams and with patients. In addition, I have asked the HSE to streamline the administrative process for dealing with applications under the Fair Deal so that patients’ discharge to a suitable long-stay facility is not delayed unnecessarily.

Smoking Ban.

69. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to further restrict smoking here; her views on the proposal to ban smoking in cars which are carrying children; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6997/10] 119 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): There are no proposals to extend the smoke free at work initiative to other areas. It should be noted however that we are further advanced than any other EU Member State, having already introduced a broad range of tobacco control measures including the removal of all display and advertising in retail outlets, restrictions on the operation of self service vending machines and the requirement for all retailers who sell tobacco products to register with the Office of Tobacco Control. Exposure to cigarette smoke is particularly dangerous in enclosed spaces, such as cars, and parents and others with responsibility for the welfare of children have a particular responsibility to ensure that such exposure does not take place.While there are currently no proposals to introduce a ban on smoking in cars where there are children present, the matter will be kept under review.

Child Protection Services.

70. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she proposes to take to address the failures in child protection services disclosed in the Health Infor- mation and Quality Authority National Children in Care Inspection Report of 2008; the steps she is taking to ensure that the Health Service Executive vets all foster carers and that there is in place a care plan in respect of every child in foster care and an allocated social worker. [6879/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): I welcome the publication of HIQA’s “National Children in Care Inspection Report of 2008”. The Report provides, inter alia, an overview of findings from the inspection of services to children in care throughout 2008. It highlights strengths and deficits in these services. The findings are designed to effect continuous improvement in the quality and outcomes of services provided to children in care. The HSE has a statutory duty to promote the welfare of children who are not receiving adequate care and protection. I am aware that the HSE is actively working to implement the recommendations set out in the report, including those relating to the vetting of foster carers and care planning generally. My Department has asked the HSE to reply directly to the Deputy on these operational matters. One of the recommendations of the HIQA Report relates to the placement of children age 12 and under in residential care. In 2009 my Office developed a ‘National Policy in relation to the placement of children aged 12 years and under in the Care or Custody of the HSE’ in response to HIQA’s recommendation. The policy states that a child aged 12 years or under should not be placed in residential care except in exceptional circumstances. These exceptional circumstances are outlined in the policy document. This policy was notified to the HSE in October 2009 for implementation. The Government is committed to ensuring that all children in care are allocated a social worker and a care plan as set out in the Implementation Plan following the Ryan Report.

Question No. 71 answered with Question No. 26.

Health Service Reform.

72. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Health and Children if she is seeking to re-engage with the trade union on implementing a reform plan for the health service which was agreed in principle in December 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6928/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The HSE and my Department are monitoring the evolving situation regarding this industrial action carefully, in close co-operation 120 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers with the Department of Finance. The action, which is under way across the public service, has the potential to cause serious disruption in the health sector, depending on its scope and scale. My main concern is to ensure that the effect of the dispute on patient care is minimised as much as possible and, so far, this has been achieved. Where issues that could impact on patient care have arisen, it has so far been possible to resolve the situation at local level. I would acknowledge the responsible approach which has been taken to date in this regard by the relevant health service unions. There is no doubt that, following a period of rapid increase in funding, the health services are now facing the challenge of managing within much tighter resource constraints. There is scope within our health system, by reforming the way services are delivered, to achieve more through greater efficiency and concentrating on services that contribute most to people’s health and well-being. There is an onus on all concerned — Government, management, trade unions and employees — to find a way of engaging on the reforms which are needed to deliver better services to patients.

Question No. 73 answered with Question No. 20.

Departmental Reports.

74. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she will take arising from the recent report of the Ombudsman for Children regarding conditions under which more than 120 children separated from their parents and seeking asylum here are housed in hostels; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [46173/09] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): The implementation plan approved by the Government on foot of the Report of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, 2009 contains a commitment that the HSE will end the use of separately run hostels for separated children seeking asylum by December 2010 and will accommodate these children in the mainstream care system. The HSE has begun the process of phasing out the hostel arrangements. Three hostels have closed and the remaining four are to close this year. The HSE, in co-operation with the agency Crosscare, are providing care staff in the remaining hostels. As the matters relating to the ongoing needs of separated children seeking asylum relating to accommodation are the responsibility of the HSE, I have accordingly referred the Deputy’s question to the HSE for further reply. In addition to these developments the HSE has developed a strong working relationship with the Garda National Immigration Bureau, GNIB, in the context of separated children and I am encouraged that the Garda has made separated children a policy priority for 2010.

Question No. 75 answered with Question No. 12.

Health Services.

76. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans for the delivery of health services in the future with particular reference to the next three years and based on the experience of the past three years; the role and development in the primary health care sector; the degree to which health centres are likely to have a major function; the extent to which the public and private sectors are likely to participate; the extent to which the co- location programme is likely to impact on the delivery of services; the degree to which the patient and taxpayer are likely to benefit from her plans; the number of hospital or medical procedures carried out separately by the public and private sector services in the past three years; the way this is likely to develop in the future; the degree to which long-term care is expected to be provided for and paid for in the relevant period; the extent to which the health 121 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.] administration is expected to develop in the context of the overall delivery of services; the investment in both the public and private health sectors in each of the past three years to date in 2010; the expected investment in each of these sectors in the next three year period; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6834/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question covers a wide range of issues which I have addressed in my opening statement to the meeting of the Joint Committee on Health and Children which took place on Tuesday 9 February. I will arrange to make a copy of the transcript of the meeting available to the Deputy.

Inter-Country Adoptions.

77. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children if the transitional arrangements which will be proposed by way of amendment by herself to the Adoption Bill, as announced (details supplied), will include all the countries for which Irish applicants have received declarations; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6992/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): The Adoption Bill 2009, is designed to give force of law to the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in respect of inter-country adoption. The new legislation, which incorporates the provisions of the Hague Convention, is designed to provide a framework to ensure that appropriate procedures have been followed and that all adoptions are effected in the best interests of the child. Future inter-country adoption arrangements will be governed by the terms of the Adoption Bill 2009 when enacted. The current policy position, as set out in the Adoption Bill 2009, is that for an adoption to be registered under the Bill it must be effected in a contracting state to the Hague Convention or in a country with which Ireland has a bilateral agreement. For non-Hague countries only those adoptions effected prior to the commencement of the new law can be registered on the Register of Inter-Country Adoptions to be established under the Bill. I announced on 26 January my intention to bring forward on Committee Stage an amendment to the Adoption Bill 2009 that will enable prospective adoptive parents to proceed with an adoption from a non-Hague or non-bilateral country, if prior to the establishment date, they have been issued with a Declaration of Eligibility and Suitability to adopt. This declaration is not country specific. However, the proposed amendment requires that the Adoption Authority (to be set up under the Act) would be satisfied that the particular adoption meets all the standards of the Hague Convention.

Mental Health Services.

78. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of child and adolescent psychiatric community teams that are in place; the number of those teams that have their full cohort of staff in accordance with A Vision for Change; her plans to increase these numbers in 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6988/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): As this is a service matter the question has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Counselling Agencies.

79. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will establish a regulatory framework applicable to crisis pregnancy agencies, a licensing system and a code of ethics similar to that enforced in other health professions and a mechanism to investigate 122 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers allegations of unethical conduct and the application of appropriate sanctions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6947/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I assume that the Deputy’s question refers to agencies that seek to manipulate women by providing a ‘disingenuous’ crisis pregnancy counselling and/or information service. While there are no plans to consider a regulatory licensing system proposed by the Deputy, the approach adopted by the HSE Crisis Pregnancy Programme, formerly known as the Crisis Pregnancy Agency, on this issue is, among other things, to further raise the public profile of State-funded crisis pregnancy services. In this regard, the programme is working on a wide range of actions that include:

• A public awareness campaign which I launched in July 2009 entitled “Don’t be manipu- lated” which highlights the existence of disingenuous agencies and promotes the availability of free, non-judgmental State-funded crisis pregnancy services;

• continuous promotion through the “Positive Options” campaign of the availability of free, non-judgmental and confidential State-funded crisis pregnancy counselling services. This campaign has been very effective in disseminating information on State-funded services. For example, statistics show that in 2008 72% of the target audience was aware of this campaign. The website for this campaign positiveoptions.ie received 58,469 visits in 2008, an increase of 78% compared with 2007, and 34,215 text messages were received requesting crisis pregnancy counselling information;

• redevelopment of the “Positive Options” website to highlight the actions of disingenuous agencies and to give guidance on how to deal with same. This section outlines the tactics used by agencies with a hidden agenda; provides questions for people to ask before they make an appointment to assess the nature of the service being provided; gives guidance on what to do during a session if people feel they are being pressurised or influenced; and provides a mechanism for people to make contact with a State-funded service or other bona fide service;

• prominent advertising of “Positive Options” and consumer tips in the Golden Pages, including the regional directories, under “Pregnancy Testing and Counselling” and “Fam- ily Planning” sections. The use of a common logo for all State-funded counselling services in current editions of the Directories;

• funding of resources which provide clear objective information on the adoption process. The programme provides information on adoption in manuals used in the training of bona fide crisis pregnancy counsellors;

• expansion of crisis pregnancy counselling services nationally by over 50% since the programme was established in 2001;

• guidance for crisis pregnancy counselling services in responding to third party complaints they may receive about “disingenuous” counselling services;

• standardised training and up-skilling for counsellors in State-funded crisis pregnancy counselling services.

Health Service Properties. 80. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to sell any land or property in 2010, the profits from which will be used in the mental health services; the funds that have been made available through the sales of such properties no longer required 123 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Sherlock.] for residential mental health purposes; if a mechanism is in place to ring fence such funds; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6990/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): One of the key priorities for mental health in the revised programme for Government, is the use of the proceeds of the sale of psychiatric lands to fund new mental health capital developments. This commitment reflects the recommendation in ‘A Vision for Change’ the report of the Expert Group on Mental Health Policy, that a plan to bring about the closure of all psychiatric hospitals should be drawn up and implemented and that the resources released by these closures should be re-invested in the mental health service. Budget 2010 provided for a multi-annual programme of capital investment in high priority mental health projects and continued funding of the programme will be made in the 2011 Estimates and subsequent years, in the light of the previous year’s programme of asset sales. In 2010, the HSE will dispose of surplus assets and reinvest an initial sum of €43 million in mental health infrastructure. The HSE has identified priority capital projects to be funded from the proceeds of such sales. Prior to 2009 the HSE disposed of a small number of psychiatric properties and the proceeds of these sales was surrendered to the Exchequer; €25 million of these proceeds was provided to the HSE to fund mental health capital developments, through the Supplementary Estimate for 2009. Projects funded included, a day centre in Clonmel and two 20 bed child and adolescent in-patient units in Cork and Galway, which are currently under construction.

Community Employment Schemes.

81. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment if a person (details supplied) in Dublin 12 will be considered for inclusion in a community employment scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7352/10] Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): As Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment I do not have a role in the administration of individual cases. The administration of individual cases is a day-to-day matter for FÁS as part of its responsibility under the Labour Services Act 1987. I have requested that FÁS contact the Deputy directly to outline the full range of supports that might be available to assist the individual concerned.

82. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the reason a person (details supplied) in Dublin 12 cannot work on a community employment scheme. [7437/10]

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): As Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment I do not have a role in the administration of individual cases. The administration of individual cases is a day-to-day matter for FÁS as part of its responsibility under the Labour Services Act 1987. I have requested that FÁS contact the Deputy directly to outline the full range of supports that might be available to assist the individual concerned.

Company Closures.

83. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the progress that has been made with the sale of a factory (details supplied) in 124 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

County Roscommon; the progress that has been achieved in procuring an alternative enterprise for the town. [7325/10] Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): In the time available it is not possible to provide the information requested.

84. Deputy James Bannon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will investigate the circumstances surrounding the closure of a company (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7336/10]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): In the time available it is not possible to provide the information requested.

Job Protection.

85. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will support a matter (details supplied). [7356/10] Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Enterprise Ireland is in constant contact with the Ireland management team of the company, and together they are focusing on preparations for meaningful engagement with Kraft management on the future of the company in Ireland. My officials are keeping me updated regularly as regards progress and when the necessary preparatory work has been done I will be engaging fully with the relevant parties. I would like to assure the Deputy that I, together with Enterprise Ireland and the other relevant State agencies, will take all possible action to protect the existing jobs in the company.

Public Sector Pay.

86. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if her attention has been drawn to the fact that, notwithstanding her recent confirmation that the Health Service Executive cannot impose pay cuts on employees of voluntary organisations, management at the County Wexford Community Workshop has informed its employees that there are to be pay cuts; if her further attention has been drawn to the fact that no discussions in relation to pay cuts have taken place between management and staff or their trade union representatives; her views on the way in which the remuneration of these workers, which is inferior to Health Service Executive pay rates, can be protected; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7376/10] Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): The County Wexford Community Workshop (CWCW) is an independent entity funded by a number of agencies including FÁS. The recent pay adjustments, as applied under the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No. 2) Act 2009, do not apply to employees of entities such as the CWCW.

Departmental Programmes.

87. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment the amounts of venture capital disbursed under the seed and venture capital programme 2007 to 2012. [7391/10] Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): A total of €175m was committed under the seed and venture capital fund 2007 to 2012. Out of this overall allocation, Enterprise Ireland has to date committed investment to 10 funds. Of 125 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Coughlan.] these, 8 funds with a total size of €525 million have commenced operations. Two further funds with a total size of €150 million remain under negotiation.

Cross-Border Projects.

88. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment, further to Parliamentary Question No. 91 of 4 February 2010, when her Department will be able to provide the requested information. [7395/10] Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): It is not clear at present when my Department will be in a position to provide the information.

Redundancy Payments.

89. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment the position regarding an application for payment of redundancy in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 12. [7446/10] Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): My Department administers the Social Insurance Fund (SIF) in relation to redundancy matters on behalf of the Department of Social and Family Affairs. There are two types of payment made from the SIF — rebates to those employers who have paid statutory redundancy to eligible employees, and statutory lump sums to employees whose employers are insol- vent and/or in receivership/liquidation. I can confirm that my Department received a statutory lump sum claim for the individual concerned on 1 December, 2009 claiming inability to pay on behalf of the employer. In respect of lump sum payments paid directly to employees, such as in this instance, the Section is, in general, processing claims dating from July 2009. Given the unprecedented increase in Redun- dancy Payment claims lodged with my Department since late 2008 it has proved impossible to maintain the customer service targets that previously obtained. The scale of the challenge is evident from the statistics that show incoming redundancy claims with a cumulative figure for 2009 of 77,001. This figure exceeds the claims lodged for 2008 (40,607) by 90% and 2008 was, of itself, an exceptional year as compared with earlier years when claims received were of the order of 25,000. Efforts continue to be made by my Department to deliver more acceptable turnaround processing times for redundancy payments given the difficulties that this gives rise to for both individual employees and the business community. Measures already taken include:

• the reassignment of 26.7 additional staff (full time equivalents) from other areas of the Department to the Redundancy Payments area since early 2009 with ongoing review of trends and demands. The current number of staff serving in the Redundancy Payments Section in terms of full time equivalents is 52.5;

• the prioritisation of the Department’s overtime budget towards staff in the Redundancy Payments Section to tackle the backlog outside normal hours;

• the establishment of a special call handling facility to deal with the huge volume of telephone calls from people and businesses who are naturally concerned about their payments, using the facilities and cooperation of the National Employment Rights Auth- ority (NERA). This centre has received an average of 12,500 calls per month this year with an estimated 60% relating to redundancy payments; 126 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

• the provision of better quality information relating to current processing times on the Department’s website;

• engagement with the Revenue Commissioners to facilitate the offset of redundancy rebate payments by employers againSt outstanding tax liabilities with the Revenue Com- missioners.

It is clear that these interventions are having an impact in that for example the numbers of claims processed and paid by the Redundancy Payments Section in 2009 and 2010 respectively amounted to 29,802 and 50,664. The Tánaiste and I are monitoring closely the impact of these changes againSt the continuing influx of redundancy claims. However, it is clear that additional measures are required to help reduce the backlog of claims, which currently stands in excess of 40,000. The Department is currently actively engaged in efforts to secure up to 16 additional staff resources deployed to the area in the first quarter of 2010.

FÁS Training Programmes.

90. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the reason a person (details supplied) in County Kildare who registered with FÁS in September 2008 has still not obtained placement on a course; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7543/10] Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): As Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment I do not have a role in the administration of individual cases. The administration of individual cases is a day-to-day matter for FÁS as part of its responsibility under the Labour Services Act 1987. I have requested that FÁS contact the Deputy directly to outline the full range of supports that might be available to assist the individual concerned.

Redundancy Payments.

91. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the mechanism her Department has in place for a person who has been made redundant in September 2009, has not been awarded their redundancy; if they are entitled to apply to her Department for statutory redundancy payment. [7565/10] Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Dara Calleary): My Department administers the Social Insurance Fund (SIF) in relation to redundancy matters on behalf of the Department of Social and Family Affairs. There are two types of payment made from the SIF — rebates to those employers who have paid statutory redundancy to eligible employees, and statutory lump sums to employees whose employers are insol- vent and/or in receivership/liquidation. I can confirm that my Department received a statutory lump sum claim for the individual concerned on 15 December, 2009 claiming inability to pay on behalf of the employer. In respect of lump sum payments paid directly to employees, such as in this instance, the Section is, in general, processing claims dating from July 2009. Given the unprecedented increase in Redun- dancy Payment claims lodged with my Department since late 2008 it has proved impossible to maintain the customer service targets that previously obtained. The scale of the challenge is evident from the statistics that show incoming redundancy claims with a cumulative figure for 2009 of 77,001. This figure exceeds the claims lodged for 2008 (40,607) by 90% and 2008 was, 127 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Dara Calleary.] of itself, an exceptional year as compared with earlier years when claims received were of the order of 25,000. Efforts continue to be made by my Department to deliver more acceptable turnaround processing times for redundancy payments given the difficulties that this gives rise to for both individual employees and the business community. Measures already taken include:

• the prioritisation of the Department’s overtime budget towards staff in the Redundancy Payments Section to tackle the backlog outside normal hours;

• the provision of better quality information relating to current processing times on the Department’s website;

• engagement with the Revenue Commissioners to facilitate the offset of redundancy rebate payments by employers againSt outstanding tax liabilities with the Revenue Com- missioners.

Insurance Industry.

92. Deputy Pádraic McCormack asked the Minister for Finance the plans he or the Govern- ment has for a Government scheme to indemnify householders who cannot get insurance cover as a result of their houses being flooded; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7348/10]

103. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding householders that have had their house insurance withdrawn or restricted due to flooding; if the Office of Public Works, another Government Department or local authority will assist in providing insurance, providing statements to allay concerns of insurers and so on; the general reaction to such statements by insurers; and if there is an agreement with insurers regarding providing insurance to flood victims. [7430/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 92 and 103 together. 128 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Early indications to date from the insurance industry suggest that many of those affected by the flooding will retain coverage albeit with a higher premium or a higher level of excess to reflect the increased risk. However, further consultation with the industry is to take place in order to determine the extent of the non renewal of flood insurance cover. As the Deputies may be aware a central element of the Government’s response to this issue will be flood preventative measures. In this regard the Government has allocated €50m for flood risk management activities for 2010, which is administered by the Office of Public Works. This increased allocation will allow OPW to deliver a range of Capital Works schemes throughout the country. However the timescale for addressing this issue will depend on the seriousness of the underlying flooding problem in the different localities. Communication between the insurance industry and the State in relation to flood preventative measures will be important in order to keep the industry informed of the steps being taken to address the underlying flood vulnerabilities. Concerning the question of renewing insurance to people who have been affected by floods, this is a commercial matter for insurance companies which is considered on a case by case basis. This allows an insurance company to properly assess the risk they are accepting. However, it should be noted that the industry has informed my Department that it is very reluctant to discontinue flood cover for existing policyholders, and would generally only do where there have been repeated flooding claims.

Banking Sector Regulation.

93. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Finance the data he has on the distribution of bank liabilities across the different categories of deposit or other instruments; the average interest payment in each, distinguishing current account balances, standard deposits, term deposits and so on in order that an accurate average cost of funds would be calculated for each bank; and if he will provide this data and in particular the aggregate retail banking sector here. [7365/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): While I have no role in relation to the collec- tion of the data referred to by the Deputy, I am informed by the Central Bank that both average retail interest rates for each instrument category and balance sheet data, which set out the different categories of liabilities and assets attributable in aggregate form to credit institutions, is published on an aggregate basis in the Central Bank’s Quarterly Bulletin and Monthly Statistics. These publications are available to download on the Central Bank’s website, www.centralbank.ie. Data relating to individual institutions is not published. I might add that the calculation of the cost of funds is inherently a matter for each institution based on a number of commercial factors specific to each institution and reflecting general credit market conditions.

Employment Rights.

94. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding bullying in the wider public service; if complaints of bullying must be againSt a named person or if cases can be taken againSt a bullying culture in an organisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7366/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): It is Civil Service policy that every employee has the right to carry out her or his duties free from any form of harassment, sexual harassment or bullying. Harassment, sexual harassment or bullying are totally unacceptable forms of behaviour, are in many instances illegal, in breach of Civil Service policy and will not be tolerated in 129 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.] the Service. Such behaviour harms professional working relationships, undermines morale and damages efficiency in the workplace. The Civil Service is committed to the development and maintenance of a positive working environment. An essential component of a positive working environment is treating colleagues with respect and dignity. The policy for the Civil Service is entitled “A Positive Working Environment — An Anti Harassment, Sexual Harassment and Bullying Policy for the Civil Service” and it is available on the Department of Finance website www.finance.gov.ie. Part II of the policy sets out the procedures for dealing with complaints of bullying and harassment. The policy emphasises the need for all reasonable efforts to be made by local management to deal with complaints without outside intervention. The policy also outlines the mediation process as a preferred alternative to a formal investigation where both parties agree to participate. Finally, the policy sets out the procedures to be followed where a decision is made to proceed to a formal investigation. In the Civil Service, it is envisaged that the majority of complaints should be resolved through informal procedures and mediation with only a very small proportion of complaints proceeding to a formal investigation and that all staff should cooperate in ensuring its successful implementation. More generally, under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 every employer has a duty to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the safety, health and welfare of their employees and to manage and conduct work activities in such a way as to prevent, as far as is reasonably practicable, any improper conduct or behaviour likely to put the safety, health and welfare at work of their employees at risk. Employees also have a duty not to engage in improper behaviour which would endanger themselves or other employees. The Health and Safety Authority works to ensure that workplace bullying is not tolerated and that employers have policies in place for dealing with bullying at work. The Authority provides information and advice on bullying and is responsible for the Code of Practice for Employers and Employees on the Prevention and Resolution of Bullying at Work. This Code provides practical guidance for employers and employees on identifying and preventing bullying at work arising from their duties under the 2005 Act. A significant element of the Code places an emphasis on the resolution of incidents of bullying using an informal process and professional mediation services. The Code reflects the legal requirement that employers carry out a risk assessment, and where bullying is identified as a hazard, they ensure that it is included in the safety statement. Employers must take reasonable steps to prevent bullying in the workplace and should put in place anti-bullying policies and established procedures for dealing with complaints of bullying in the workplace. Employers should deal with complaints immediately. The Labour Relations Commission has published a Code of Practice detailing Procedures for Addressing Bullying in the Workplace. In addition, the Employment Equality Acts 1998 and 2004, which apply generally to employments in Ireland and of course the public service, deal with harassment and sexual harassment in the workplace or in the course of employment. The Acts place a responsibility on employers to ensure that harassment or sexual harassment will not be tolerated where perpetrated by the employer, employee, client or business customer. Employers are compelled to take such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure a work environment free of harassment or sexual harassment. The legislation also provides that different treatment of a person because of harassment or sexual harassment, whether in the workplace, in the course of employment or outside of the workplace, constitutes discrimination. 130 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

A person who considers she or he has been discriminated againSt under the Act (such as being subject to harassment or sexual harassment) may seek support from the Equality Auth- ority to take a case under the Act againSt her or his employer. A person may also refer a case directly to the Director of the Equality Tribunal appointed by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Director will investigate each case (except those resolved by mediation) submitted to her or him and will issue a decision. The decision is binding and enforceable through the Circuit Court.

Credit Unions.

95. Deputy Pádraic McCormack asked the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the fact that credit unions are charging borrowers 12% interest on loans; his views on whether this is an exorbitant rate of interest for borrowers to have to pay; and his plans to alter the regulations to have these exorbitant interest rates reduced. [7373/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The principal legislation under which credit unions are regulated in Ireland is the Credit Union Act 1997 as amended (the Act). One of the objects referred to in the conditions of registration of a credit union is the creation of sources of credit for the mutual benefit of its members at a fair and reasonable rate of interest In relation to interest on loans under Section 38 of the Act, a credit union may charge interest on loans made to its members under certain conditions, one of which is that the interest on the loan shall not at any time exceed one per cent per month on the amount of the loan outstanding at that time. The interest on the loan shall in every case include all the charges made by the credit union in making that loan. Credit Unions will have a standard rate of interest which may be less than 12 per cent but which in any case, under Section 38 of the Act, cannot exceed 12 per cent (i.e. 1 per cent per month). Credit unions may also offer classes of loans at rates of interest which are less than their standard rate of interest e.g. loans for particular purposes such as for cars, home improvement loans, education etc. The rate of interest charged on any class of loans granted at a particular time shall be the same for all loans of that class. I am informed that a representative sample of rates currently being applied by credit unions indicates an average standard rate of 10% interest on loans. This sample does not include classes of loans other than those to which the standard rate applies, ie loans which attract a rate lower than the standard. Section 37 C of the Act sets out the details which a credit union must include in its credit agreement with a member — this includes setting out the rate of interest charged in respect of the loan and the relevant APR. The forthcoming Strategic Review of Credit Unions, being initiated by the Financial Regulator at my request, will be comprehensive and will include consumer protection issues. Its recommendations will inform the development of policy in relation to credit unions and will feed into a review of credit union legislation.

96. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Finance if he has initiated a review of credit union legislation; if a steering group within his Department has been established to co- ordinate the various aspects of this review; and if he will give assurances that the review will not adopt a solely regulatory perspective. [7375/10]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I have requested the Financial Regulator to initiate a strategic review of the credit union sector in Ireland. This will involve an examination of the structure, operation, regulation and legislation of the credit union sector with a view to providing a report making recommendations, including specific proposals to strengthen pruden- tial soundness. This will advise and inform an assessment of the future strategic direction of credit unions and will feed into a review of credit union legislation. 131 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.]

The Financial Regulator is to manage the review and officials of my Department are consulting with the Registrar of Credit Unions in agreeing the Terms of Reference. This comprehensive review is to be an objective assessment carried out by independent experts in consultation with all of the stakeholders. Its conclusions and recommendations will inform the development of policy in relation to credit unions, including an appropriate regulatory framework.

Decentralisation Programme.

97. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the amount of money paid for the site purchased at Knock Airport, County Mayo, for the purpose of decentralisation; and if there was associated costs incurred by the Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7380/10] Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): The Commis- sioners of Public Works paid €390,000 for a 6 acre site at Knock Airport. Associated ancillary costs amounted to €23,000 approx.

98. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the terms that were agreed for the site in Charlestown, County Mayo identified for the purposes of decentralisation; if these terms will change as a result of the deferral of the final decision in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7382/10]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): The Contract for Sale has not been completed in respect of this transaction. Accordingly, it is deemed to be commercially sensitive and it would not be appropriate to publish the draft terms at this stage. Further consideration of the matter will take place when the Government has completed its review of the Decentralisation Programme in 2011.

Flood Relief.

99. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding an application (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7396/10] Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): Wicklow County Council have within the past week submitted to the Office of Public Works applications for funding for flood mitigation works in a number of locations in the County. The proposed works include widening of channels, replacement of gullies, alteration of bridges and provision of a flood warning system. The OPW are currently considering the applications, in conjunction with applications received from other Local Authorities, having regard to overall availability of resources.

Car Scrappage Scheme.

100. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding a car scrappage scheme in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Wicklow; if, in view of the circumstances they will be allocated the car scrappage. [7400/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The provisions of the scheme as set out in Section 102 of the Finance Bill as published on 4 February 2010, provide that the car being scrapped, must be registered in the State in the name of the registered owner of the new car for at least 18 months previous to the date of scrappage; must be 10 years old or more from the date of first registration; must be scrapped on or after 10 December 2009; must be scrapped 132 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers within 60 days of the date of the new car being registered, or have been scrapped within 60 days immediately before the date of the new car being registered; must have a valid NCT test certificate, or one that has expired no more than 90 days immediately before the date of scrappage or documentation to indicate that it has been presented for and failed an NCT roadworthiness test in the previous 6 months; must have been insured for use on the road in the name of the registered owner for at least 12 months in the 18 months immediately prior to the date of scrappage. The legislation as published therefore requires that the person to whom the scrappage allowance is paid must be the same as the person to whom the policy of insurance is issued in respect of the car being scrapped.

Tax Code.

101. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Finance the proposals he has to extend mortgage interest relief to the full term of qualifying loans; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7401/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): In Budget 2010, I announced that I would be extending mortgage interest relief up to the end of 2017 for those whose entitlement to relief was due to end in 2010 or after. Qualifying loans taken out on or before 31 December 2011 will continue to get relief at current levels. Qualifying loans taken out after 31 December 2011 but before the end of 2012 will received the relief at a reduce rate. The reduced rate will be 15% for first-time buyers and 10% for non-first time buyers with ceilings of €6,000 for married couples and €3,000 for single individuals applying in both cases. Loans taken out on or after 1 January 2013 will not qualify for mortgage interest relief and the relief will be abolished completely for the tax year 2018 and subsequent tax years. Full details of this measure are set out in the Finance Bill.

Car Scrappage Scheme.

102. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Finance if a person (details supplied) will qualify under the motor scrappage scheme. [7403/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The provisions of the scheme as set out in Section 102 of the Finance Bill as published on 4 February 2010, provide that the car being scrapped, must be registered in the State in the name of the registered owner of the new car for at least 18 months previous to the date of scrappage; must be 10 years old or more from the date of first registration; must be scrapped on or after 10 December 2009; must be scrapped within 60 days of the date of the new car being registered, or have been scrapped within 60 days immediately before the date of the new car being registered; must have a valid NCT test certificate, or one that has expired no more than 90 days immediately before the date of scrappage or documentation to indicate that it has been presented for and failed an NCT roadworthiness test in the previous 6 months; must have been insured for use on the road in the name of the registered owner for at least 12 months in the 18 months immediately prior to the date of scrappage. The legislation as published therefore requires that the person to whom the scrappage allowance is paid must be the same as the person to whom the policy of insurance is issued in respect of the car being scrapped.

Question No. 103 answered with Question No. 92. 133 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Pension Provisions.

104. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Finance if the 2010 element of emoluments announced in budget 2010 will be recalculated on the full rate of pay for the purposes of calculating pensions in relation to nursing staff and other staff who have a liability to work unsocial hours, one third of their last three years emolument is added to basic pay to calculate pensionable remuneration (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7436/10] Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Budget 2010 provided for a reduction in the pay of public servants with effect from 1 January 2010.Public servants who retire on or before 31 December 2010 will have their pension benefits calculated based on pensionable remuneration, i.e. the aggregate of retiring salary and pensionable allowances, by reference to the scales applying on 31 December 2009, with incremental credit on those scales, if appropriate. The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No. 2) Act 2009, which gave effect to the pay reduction, provides that I may, having considered the potential legal, superannuation and personnel management issues and impacts for the public service, extend the period mentioned above beyond the specified date of 31 December 2010. Department of Finance Circular 10/2008 introduced a revised method of reckoning variable pensionable allowances for pension purposes with effect from 1 April 2004. It provides, inter alia, that the method of reckoning be changed from the previous averaging of the last three years of allowances, to an average of the variable pensionable allowances received in the best three consecutive years in the ten years preceding retirement, as uprated to the date of retirement. In the case of the health sector, the Department of Health and Children Circular 8/2008 refers. Public servants who retire on or before 31 December 2010 therefore will, where appropriate, have the pensionable value of their variable pensionable allowances determined by reference to an average of the allowances received in the best three consecutive years in the ten years preceding retirement in 2010. In calculating and uprating the value of allowances paid in 2010, pay rates applying at 31 December 2009 will be used.

Departmental Correspondence.

105. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Finance the extent to which contact has been made or established with a person (detail supplied) in County Kildare whose car was damaged by a falling tree while travelling through Phoenix Park on 22 January 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7541/10] Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): The matter has been referred to the State Claims Agency.

Flood Relief.

106. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Finance the position regarding the allocation of funding for flooding defence in Carrick-on-Shannon and Leitrim village, County Leitrim. [7562/10] Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): The Office of Public Works recently invited applications from Local Authorities for funding for minor flood mitigation works and studies they propose to undertake in their administrative areas in 2010, subject to specific economic and environmental criteria and the type and scale of works 134 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers involved. It would be open to Leitrim County Council to submit applications in respect of Carrick-on-Shannon and Leitrim under this scheme.

Hospital Accommodation.

107. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on whether many of the maternity hospitals here are overcrowded and inadequate for their purpose; when proposals to replace the three large Dublin maternity hospitals and the Mid-Western Regional Maternity Hospital with new units on the grounds of acute general hospitals will be implemented; the discussions she has had on using the proposed national solidarity bonds, announced in budget 2010, for this purpose; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7127/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The number of births in recent years has risen considerably and is projected by the HSE to be in excess of 76,000 this year. This increase has placed great pressures on maternity services across the country. The HSE is committed to developing a strategic approach to maternity services nationally. The first stage in this work was the Review of Maternity & Gynaecology Services in the Greater Dublin Area. The review, which was conducted for the HSE by KPMG Consultants, was published last year. The Report recommended that services at the Coombe Women & Infants University Hospital be moved to the Adelaide Meath & National Childrens Hospital (AMNCH), Tallaght; services at the National Maternity Hospital, Holles St, be moved to St Vincent’s University Hospital and services currently delivered at the Rotunda Hospital be moved to the Mater site. The HSE is developing an implementation plan to deal with the key recommendations in the report, including the development of midwifery led units and a fetal medicine network. In relation to services at the Coombe moving to Tallaght, a Transition Group has been established between both hospitals with a view to having local working groups in place shortly to advance the relevant workstreams as recommended in the Report. In relation to services at Holles Street moving to the site of St Vincent’s, the HSE is actively pursuing all opportunities to expedite the move within the earliest possible timescale. In relation to the services at the Rotunda moving to the Mater site, the Design Team for the National Paediatric Hospital has been appointed and included as part of the brief is the accommodation of maternity, adult and paediatric services on the site. The HSE is working on plans to relocate the Mid Western Regional Maternity Hospital to the site of the Mid Western Regional Hospital at Dooradoyle. The project is currently at appraisal stage. The Minister for Finance announced in the Budget that the Government intends to introduce a National Solidarity Bond which will allow ordinary citizens to contribute to national economic recovery. However, as indicated by the Minister at the time of the Budget, the proceeds of the bond will not be used to fund additional expenditure over and above that decided on by the Government in the context of the Budget.

Services for People with Disabilities.

108. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children when she will introduce legislation to regulate and inspect disability services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7229/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): I will shortly be bringing detailed proposals to Government with regard to the protection of vulnerable adults with disabilities who are currently in institutional care. As Deputies will be aware, “National Quality Standards: Residential Settings for People with Disabilities” which relate to 135 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy John Moloney.] adult services have been published by HIQA. Following a public consultation process initiated by HIQA they were formulated by a Standards Advisory Group that comprised officials of HIQA, my Department, the HSE, service providers, organisations representing people with disabilities and service users. These standards will provide a national framework for quality, safe services for persons with disabilities in a residential setting. Given the current economic situation, to move to full statutory implementation of the standards, including regulation and inspection, presents significant challenges at this time. However, notwithstanding the difficulties of immediate statutory implementation, my Department, the HSE and HIQA have agreed that progressive non-statutory implementation of the Standards will now commence, and that they will become the benchmark againSt which the HSE assesses both its own directly operated facilities and other facilities that the HSE funds. Discussions are ongoing regarding the development of self-assessment tools, providing awareness training for service providers and the introduction of an appropriate level of external validation for relevant settings. A number of preliminary processes are already in place within the HSE to facilitate this work. For example, compliance with the HIQA standards is included in the Service Level Arrangements being implemented between the HSE and service providers. As part of the ongoing review of Service Level Arrangements, service providers will now be required to demonstrate compliance with the standards through the provision of audit outcomes. I am informed by the HSE that the majority of service providers have already commenced a review of their services within the context of the HIQA standards and many service providers have also achieved external accreditation over the past number of years. In addition, I am assured by the HSE that it has a robust system in place to deal with any complaints made in relation to the treatment of persons with disabilities in residential care. This includes ensuring that all HSE funded service providers of residential care have appropriate complaints procedures that are in line with HSE policy.

Health Services.

109. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding the provision of a drug to a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [7320/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Hospital Accommodation.

110. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will give a commitment that the number of community respite beds available in community hospitals and used by persons living in the community for respite purposes will be maintained at current levels following the introduction of the nursing home support scheme, a fair deal; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7327/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): As the Deputy is aware, the Nursing Homes Support Scheme only applies to long-term residential care. The designation and composition of the overall beds (including respite beds) in Com- munity Hospitals is a service matter and I have asked the Health Service Executive to reply directly on this issue.

136 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Ambulance Service.

111. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason weekly transport has been withdrawn from a person (details supplied) in County Longford to attend Longford-Westmeath General Hospital for blood tests; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7333/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Complementary Therapies.

112. Deputy Darragh O’Brien asked the Minister for Health and Children the progress made to date on the commitment to promote greater use of and regulation of complementary therapies, in particular in the mental health area; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7343/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Report of the National Work- ing Group on the Regulation of Complementary Therapists in 2006 made recommendations on strengthening the regulatory environment for complementary therapists. The Report of the National Working Group outlined guidance for professional associations and provided examples of codes of ethics and good practice, including grievance and disciplinary procedures. To support the development of robust voluntary self-regulation, my Department has facilitated the provision of work days to facilitate different therapies to come together to undertake a process of harmonisation and development with regard to common basic standards of practice, education and training. Among the recommendations contained in the Report of the National Working Group on the Regulation of Complementary Therapists was that the Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC) take a role in the accreditation of programmes of higher education and training for complementary therapists. HETAC has now determined and published a set of standards for complementary therapies to be used in the accreditation of any programmes submitted by providers of education and training in complementary therapies. These standards will be a valuable tool in the accreditation of relevant education and training programmes. In adopting these standards, HETAC has identified a requirement that each programme within a therapy should only be validated when there is federation into one representative organisation for that therapy. Federation of individual professional therapy associations into one representative organisation for that therapy is a key component required for the development of common standards of education and training for complementary therapies. This approach is essential to ensure harmonisation of standards and to eliminate variations in standards of education and training or codes of practice within each complementary therapy discipline. The complementary therapy sector is currently engaged in forming the solid frameworks and federations with which to link and to govern the sector, and it is hoped that further progress in this area can be achieved over time.

Medicinal Products.

113. Deputy Darragh O’Brien asked the Minister for Health and Children the progress that has been made to date in the Programme for Government commitment to promote and ensure coexistence of complementary and conventional medicine; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7344/10] 137 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Irish Medicines Board (IMB) is responsible for the regulation of medicinal products in Ireland; this includes herbal homeopathic medicinal products which could be seen as complementary medicines. The IMB author- ises and registers these medicinal products in accordance with Irish and EU legislation. This ensures that they meet the necessary standards of quality, safety and where appropriate efficacy. The IMB has established a Simplified Registration Scheme for homeopathic medicinal products. This covers homeopathic products for oral and external use without medicinal claims. In addition the IMB is currently putting in place a National Rules Scheme for homeopathic medicinal products with medical indications which do not qualify for registration under the Simpli- fied Registration Scheme. This new scheme will provide for homeopathic medicines with claims for mild self limiting conditions. It is anticipated that the introduction of this National Rules Scheme will, in addition to the Simplified Scheme already established, facilitate licensing of homeopathic medicinal products on the Irish market, thus ensuring their standards and their continued availability to the public. Herbal medicinal products can be licensed in two ways. They can either obtain a marketing authorisation using the same procedures as for conventional medicines or a Certificate of Trad- itional-use Registration as per Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended. The Traditional-use Regis- tration Scheme has been established in recognition of the significant number of medicinal products which do not fulfil the requirements for a marketing authorisation despite their long tradition of use, recognised efficacy and acceptable levels of safety. It is anticipated that the introduction of this Traditional-use Registration Scheme will facilitate licensing of herbal medicinal products on the Irish market, thus ensuring their safety and continued availability to the public. In relation to the role of complementary therapists in the provision of health services, the Report of the National Working Group in the Regulation of Complementary Therapists outlined guidance for professional associations and provided examples of codes of ethics and good practice, including grievance and disciplinary procedures. In addition, the Department of Health and Children has facilitated the provision of work days. The purpose of these days is for different therapies to come together to undertake a process of harmonisation and development with regard to common basic standards of practice, education and training. In addition, these facilitated work days provide a forum for greater cohesion within each therapy. Work days were organised in 2007 for a number of the higher risk therapies as categorised in the Report of the National Working Group on the Regulation of Complementary Therapists i.e. acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine, herbal medicine, aromatherapy and homeopathy. Among the recommendations contained in the Report of the National Working Group on the Regulation of Complementary Therapists was that the Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC) take a role in the accreditation of programmes of higher education and training for complementary therapists. HETAC has now determined and published a set of standards for complementary therapies to be used in the accreditation of any programmes submitted by providers of education and training in complementary therapies. These standards will be a valuable tool in the accreditation of relevant education and training programmes. In adopting these standards, HETAC has identified a requirement that each programme within a therapy should only be validated when there is federation into one representative organisation for that therapy. Federation of individual professional therapy associations into one representative organisation for that therapy is a key component required for the development of common standards of education and training for complementary therapies. This approach is essential to ensure 138 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers harmonisation of standards and to eliminate variations in standards of education and training or codes of practice within each complementary therapy discipline. The complementary therapy sector is currently engaged in forming the solid frameworks and federations with which to link and to govern the sector.

Medical Cards.

114. Deputy Thomas Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding an application for a medical card in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Meath. [7346/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Hospital Waiting Lists.

115. Deputy Pádraic McCormack asked the Minister for Health and Children if figures are available for the number of persons awaiting outpatient appointments, medical and surgical, nationally and who are awaiting appointment for a consultant in order to be placed on the inpatient waiting list; if those figures are published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7347/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The management of out-patient waiting lists is a matter for the HSE and the individual hospitals concerned. I have, therefore, referred the Deputy’s question to the Executive for direct reply.

Assisted Human Reproduction.

116. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will respond to a matter (details supplied). [7355/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Supreme Court recently decided in the RvR (frozen embryos) case that the frozen embryos at issue in the case do not have the constitutional protection of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution. It is my intention to bring forward proposals to Government later this year with a view to drafting legislation to govern the area of Assisted Human Reproduction and related practices. The work involved in developing these proposals will examine and consider — among other things — the issues arising from the frozen embryos Supreme Court judgment.

Medical Cards.

117. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding the cases of medical card arrears in the Dublin area and specifically the position regarding the renewal of an application in respect of persons (details supplied) in Dublin 9. [7369/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Hospital Waiting Lists.

118. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) will be called for surgery; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7385/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply. 139 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Drug Treatment Programme.

119. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of medical detox beds available for rehabilitating drug addicts; the location of these beds; the cost of each bed; the waiting time to access one of these beds; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7420/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy’s question relates to a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

120. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of beds available for drug detox in community based residential detox units; the location of these beds; the cost of each bed; the number of persons on a waiting list for admission to this service; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7421/10]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy’s question relates to a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

121. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of needle exchange services operating here; the location of each; the cost of running each service; the number of patients each service treated in 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7422/10]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy’s question relates to a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

122. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of drug addicts here; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7423/10]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy’s question relates to a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

123. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of persons that are on the methadone treatment programme here; the cost of this programme in 2009; if these persons are encouraged to come off methadone after a certain length of time; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7424/10]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy’s question relates to a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Nursing Homes Support Scheme.

124. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Health and Children the locations available for long-term 24/7 care for young patients in a coma here; if, in relation to the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11, who is occupying a full bed in hospital, assistance will be provided to find and pay for long-term suitable accommodation; and if flexibility will be shown in the fair deal scheme to provide same. [7427/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): The Nursing Homes Support Scheme is not limited to people over the age of 65. The first stage in the application process for the scheme is a Care Needs Assessment. This determines whether the applicant requires long-term nursing home care. Anyone who is deemed to require such care may apply to avail of the scheme. The details supplied by the Deputy’s refer to a specific 140 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers individual, therefore the query has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply.

Pharmacy Services.

125. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will respond to correspondence from a person (details supplied) which shows that the cost of the medical prescription Omeprazone 20mgs costs €51.13 in County Louth while the same prescription costs £7.92 in Newry, Northern Ireland; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7434/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The price of medicines supplied to patients in Ireland under the GMS and community drugs schemes is built up as follows. Firstly, ex-factory prices are set in accordance with agreements between the Health Service Executive (HSE) and pharmaceutical manufacturers. Secondly, in addition to reimbursing pharmacists the ex-factory price of the product, the HSE also pays a wholesale mark-up of 10%, a dispensing fee of up to €5 and a 20% retail mark-up. (This is not applicable in the case of medical card prescriptions). There are substantial differences between Ireland and the U.K. in the procurement, pricing and reimbursement structures for medicines. It is difficult, therefore, to comment on the apparent price differential quoted by the Deputy for transactions in Co. Louth and Newry without detailed information concerning the brand supplied, the pack size and any other factors that may be relevant. The HSE publishes on its website a list of the drug prices it reimburses to pharmacists which are the ex-factory price plus a 10% wholesale mark-up. In the case of Omeprazole 20mgs tablets, reimbursement prices range from €4.53 for a 7 tablet pack to €19.20 for a 30 tablet pack. For a person availing of the Drugs Payment Scheme, a pharmacist would add a 20% retail mark-up and a dispensing fee of up to €5. This would mean that the cost of Omeprazole 20mgs tablets available here and supplied under the DPS can range from approx €10.43 for a 7 tablet pack to €28.04 for a 30 tablet pack. On the basis of the information available to me it would appear that the price quoted in Co. Louth includes a 50% retail mark-up and does not reflect the recent 40% price reduction. If that is the case, it is clearly unsatisfactory and unfair to a DPS card holder. My Department and the HSE have implemented a number of reforms to reduce the cost of medicines for both the State and patients. Under the terms of Agreements in 2006 between the HSE and pharmaceutical manufacturers, price cuts of 35% were applied to all proprietary products for which generic alternatives are available on the Irish market. Following recent discussions with the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA), further price cuts of 40% have been applied for a large number of drugs and medicines with effect from 1 February. It is important to note that these price cuts apply to all transactions and not just those under the various State schemes. I will continue to examine all options for containing pharmaceutical expenditure and reducing the prices of medicines for both the State and patients. In this regard, the Government has approved my proposal to introduce a system of reference pricing combined with generic substitution under the GMS and community drugs schemes. This will encourage greater use of cheaper generic alternatives and lead to further savings in the State’s drugs bill. I expect to see significant progress on this in 2010, including the identification and implementation of legislative and administrative changes required to give it effect.

Patient Private Property Funds.

126. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children, further to Parliamentary Question No. 93 of 10 December 2009, the value of payments made to date in 2010; the number of payments which have been issued; when repayments will commence in the 141 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Denis Naughten.] western region; the timetable for the completion of this process and the reclaim procedure for the next of kin; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7442/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The task of calculating and preparing payments of interest previously retained on invested PPP funds by the HSE is continuing. No payments have been made to date in 2010 although it is planned that payments to clients in the HSE West area will commence as soon as possible in 2010. The HSE is identifying the recipients of these payments from records retained at each Care Centre nationally. There is no requirement on clients or next of kin to make an application for this payment.

Child Care Services.

127. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children, further to Parliamentary Question No. 207 of 7 July 2009, if, in view of the less than projected uptake of the early children care and education scheme, she will extend the scheme to all children up to the age of five years that are to commence school in September 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7444/10] Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): I have responsibility for the free Pre-School Year in Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) scheme which was introduced in January of this year. Approximately 4,000 pre-school services are participating in the scheme with over 51,000 (more than 80%) of children in their pre- school year availing of a free pre-school year place. This rises to over 53,500 (almost 85%) of children in their pre-school year, when account is taken of those availing of a pre-school year under the Community Childcare Subvention Scheme (CCSS), which is also implemented by my Office. This represent a very high take-up of the scheme, particularly in the initial interim period in advance of the first full year of the scheme from September next. The age range in which children qualify for the scheme spans a period of almost 17 months and includes all children aged more than 3 years 2 months and less than 4 years 7 months in September of each year. Children born between 2 February 2005 and 30 June 2006 qualified for the free pre-school year in January this year and children born between 2 February 2006 and 30 June 2007 will qualify for the free pre-school year in September 2010. Exceptions to the upper age limit are allowed where children are developmentally delayed or it is necessary to accept children at an older age due to the enrolment policy of local primary schools. The age range in which children qualify for the ECCE will mean that children benefiting from the scheme will, generally, commence primary school when they are aged more than 4 years 2 months and less than 5 years 7 months in September of each year. This is considered reasonable, given that the great majority of children commence school between the age of 4 years 6 months and 5 years 6 months. While broad, it is considered that the age span of almost 17 months remains sufficiently targeted to meet the objective of the scheme of providing appropriate age related activities and programmes to children within a specific age cohort. If the upper age limit were to be increased to 5 years the result would be that children, in general, would be expected to commence primary school between the age of 4 years 9 months and 6 years. If the Deputy is suggesting that the upper age limit for the scheme should be increased to align with children being aged 5 years when they commence primary school, the result would be to reduce the qualifying age span to a one year period between the minimum statutory age of 4 years and age 5. I am satisfied that the age range set for the scheme achieves a more reasonable balance between supporting the provision of age related programmes and activities and providing flexibility to parents and their children. 142 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Medical Cards.

128. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she is taking to reduce the waiting time for medical card applications; if the Health Service Execu- tive will temporarily employ those without work or incorporate a FÁS scheme to use the skills of those on unemployment benefit to clear the backlog; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7445/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I wrote to all Oireachtas members on 19th January 2010 regarding the Health Service Executive’s (HSE) decision to centralise the processing of all medical card applications and reviews and I outlined a range of measures being employed by the Executive to address issues arising from this initiative and I also referred to the various enhancements that this process will facilitate upon completion. As indicated in my letter, the HSE is currently putting arrangements in place to track the time taken by each local health office to process medical card applications. I have asked the Executive for a report on this issue and upon receipt of same, I shall give further consideration to the matter.

Health Service Executive Reports.

129. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children, further to Parliamentary Question No. 145 of 16 December 2009, the progress made regarding a report (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7455/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): The Health Service Executive agreed in December to allow one further submission to be made to the Non-Statutory Inquiry referred to by the Deputy. This Inquiry has received this submission and is currently considering it. The question of dissemination of the Report is a matter for the Executive.

Nursing Homes Support Scheme.

130. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding an application in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork under the nursing home support scheme. [7502/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply.

Medical Cards.

131. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children when a medical card will issue in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7539/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

132. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding an application for a medical card in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7540/10]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Health Service Staff.

133. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding 143 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Pat Breen.] the incentivised early retirement scheme for the Health Service Executive; if she has received a request from the HSE to lift the suspension as it applied to this scheme; her views on same; when she expects to make a decision on this matter; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7559/10] Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I can confirm that the HSE recently requested my Department’s approval to lift the suspension as it applied to the ISER, and to allow it to proceed to process to finalisation applications received prior to the closing date of 23 October, 2009. Following consideration of the proposal by my Department in consultation with the Department of Finance the HSE has now agreed that the suspension may be lifted in respect of those applications approved by the closing date of the scheme. My Depart- ment is in touch with the HSE to ensure this initiative commences without delay and in line with the original terms of the scheme.

Road Network.

134. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Transport if he has received an application from Wicklow County Council for funding in respect of road improvements and repairs; the details of this application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7397/10] Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I assume that the Deputy is referring to the 2010 regional and local road grant applications submitted by Wicklow County Council. As the Deputy is aware, the improvement and maintenance of regional and local roads, in its area, is a statutory function of each road authority in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the Roads Act, 1993. Works on such roads are a matter for the relevant local authority to be funded from its own resources supplemented by State road grants. The initial selection and prioritisation of projects to be funded is also a matter for the local authority. Regional and local road grants are allocated under a number of grant categories. The main categories of grant, for which local authorities select projects for regional and local road grant aid, are the Specific Improvement Grant Scheme, the Strategic Grant Scheme and the Restoration Improvement Grant Scheme. The projects submitted to my Department by Wicklow County Council for funding in 2010 under those grant categories are set out in the following tables. I am at present considering the allocation of funding for all local authorities. The 2010 allocations will be announced shortly.

Table 1

S 20 Specific Improvement Grant Applications 2010

L4377: Ballysmuttan Bridge L759: Liffey Bridge Lower Castlekevin Bridge R750: Porters Bridge L97532: Three Wells Bridge R752: White Bridge L8804: Colbinstown Bridge R747: Baltinglass Bridge R747: Woodenbridge to Arklow R761: Blacklion to Killincarrig L5098: Friars Hill L4364: Lacken, Blessington

144 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Table 2: Strategic Regional and Local Road Grant Applications 2010

Wicklow Town Relief Road & Port Access Road.

Table 3: Restoration Improvement Grant Applications 2010

IRI Survey Craffield Kilmolin to Ballybrew Brewery Lane/Back St/Parnell Park/Union Lane N11 to Kiladreenan Scalp Rd. (County Boundary to Monastery) Three Wells Glencree Rd. (Curtlestown to R115 at Aurora) Killacloran to Kilpipe Castlekevin Ballinabarney Annacarter Cross — Millers Road Ballycapple — Kilcandra Ballycullen — Moneystown Ballyguile — Kilpoole Ballinteskin Askanagap — Slievemweel Hillbrook Lower — Kilcavan Lower Coolattin — Stoops Baltinglass — Rathtoole Ballinclea — Drumreagh Blackditches — Lockstown Johnstown — Harristown Lodge Lane Three Castles

Garda Stations.

135. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the damage to a Garda station (details supplied) in County Mayo caused by burst water pipes; if the necessary provisions for the repair work will be carried out; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7340/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret that current information with regard to the station referred to by the Deputy is not readily to hand. I will write to the Deputy as soon as it is available.

Departmental Staff.

136. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, further to Parliamentary Question No. 688 of 3 November 2009, the position regarding the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 9; if he will make a payment in lieu of interest on the overpayments made over the years; if he will remedy the error and make payment in lieu of denial of interest that this person would have earned on their savings if overpayments of pen- 145 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Noel Ahern.] sion contribution were not taken; the way the benefits payable over the years from both schemes could be the same. [7367/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am pleased to inform the Deputy that following consultation with the Department of Finance, my Department will be refunding the officer concerned the difference between the nominal amount of the overpayment (which has already been refunded) and changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the period during which the overpayment occurred. As I explained in my reply to the Deputy’s question of 3 November 2009, the officer concerned was employed in an un- established capacity and could not therefore be a member of the Pension Scheme for Estab- lished Civil Servants. Having said that, as the benefits payable to officers recruited after 6 April 1995 are integrated with the Old Age Contributory Pension, and are determined, in part, by an officer’s final salary, the payments under both Schemes are the same (as the final salary is fixed).

Asylum Applications.

137. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding the residency situation of cases; the number of this category that were given the right to stay; if their approvals or a significant number of them have been recently lapsed; if they will have approvals extended as work approvals are being withdrawn due to residency doubts; the position regarding the case of a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7370/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I wish to inform the Deputy that I am aware of the situation to which he refers, which is specific to the parents of Irish Born Children granted permission to remain in the State under the IBC/05 Scheme. A total of 14,254 applications for renewal of permission to remain in the State under the IBC/05 Scheme were received in my Department since 1 January, 2007, of which 14,139 were granted for a 3 year period during 2007. These parents are due to have their permission renewed over the course of 2010, with a high proportion of renewals arising in the 6 month period from May to October. The practical arrangements for the registration of those parents, including the person in question, who are being granted renewal of their permission to remain in the State are being discussed with the Garda National Immigration Bureau. I anticipate that a notice clarifying the arrangements will shortly appear in the newspapers and will also be posted on the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service website at www.inis.ie

Departmental Correspondence.

138. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will release a copy of the original letter sent to a person (details supplied) outlining their permission to stay here. [7393/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret to advise the Deputy that it is not possible to provide a response to his Question at this time. The information sought by the Deputy will be provided at a later date.

Garda Stations.

139. Deputy Charlie O’Connor asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will provide resources to Tallaght Garda Station, Dublin 24, to allow for special attention

146 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers to be afforded to the increased incidence of burglaries in estates (details supplied) in the area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7415/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The allocation of Garda resources, including the distribution of personnel, is a matter for the Garda Com- missioner and senior Garda management. They are aided in this by a distribution model which indicates the most effective means of distributing Garda personnel and acts as a guide to Garda management decision making. It takes into account different policing variables, including crime trends, socio-economic factors, and census information. The areas referred to by the Deputy are in the Southern Division of the Dublin Metropolitan Region. I will update the Deputy with the latest strength of the Garda Districts policing these areas as soon as they are to hand.

Asylum Applications.

140. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding assessment for eligibility for residency or naturalisation and subsistence payment in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Laois; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7508/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my detailed Reply to his earlier Parliamentary Question No. 140 of Thursday, 8 October 2009, in this matter. The position in the State of the person concerned is as set out in that Reply. It is not clear as to what the Deputy means in his references to “assessment for eligibility for residency” or “subsistence payment” in the context of his Question. Given that the person concerned has never had legal residency in the State, the issue of naturalisation does not arise.

Residency Permits.

141. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding the case of residency or family reunification in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Waterford; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7509/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret to advise the Deputy that it is not possible to provide a response to his Question at this time. The information sought by the Deputy will be provided at a later date.

142. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason only a three month extension of stamp four has been given in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 15; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7510/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret to advise the Deputy that it is not possible to provide a response to his Question at this time. The information sought by the Deputy will be provided at a later date.

Asylum Applications.

143. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress regarding a residency application and the procedure to be followed in respect of naturalisation in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7511/10]

147 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The person concerned applied for asylum on 2 February 2005. In accordance with Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended), he was entitled to remain in the State until his application for asylum was decided. His asylum application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Arising from the refusal of his asylum application, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was notified, by letter dated 30 September 2005, that the Minister proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of him. He was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of leaving the State voluntarily, of consenting to the making of a Deportation Order or of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why a Deportation Order should not be made againSt him. Representations have been received on behalf of the person concerned and these representations will be fully considered, under Section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended) and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) on the prohibition of refoulement, before the file is passed to me for decision. Once a decision has been made, this decision and the consequences of the decision will be conveyed in writing to the person concerned.

Departmental Reviews.

144. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will review the case of persons (details supplied) in Dublin 12; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7512/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret to advise the Deputy that it is not possible to provide a response to his Question at this time. The information sought by the Deputy will be provided at a later date.

Residency Permits.

145. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Louth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7513/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret to advise the Deputy that it is not possible to provide a response to his Question at this time. The information sought by the Deputy will be provided at a later date.

146. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Galway; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7514/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my detailed Reply to his recent Parliamentary Question, No. 323 of Tuesday, 24 November, 2009, in this matter. The position in the State of the person concerned is as set out in that Reply.

147. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7515/10]

148 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my detailed Reply to his recent Parliamentary Question, No. 259 of Tuesday, 13 October, 2009, in this matter. The position in the State of the person concerned is as set out in that Reply.

148. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason the residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare has been reduced from stamp four to stamp three, thereby depriving them of a social welfare payment despite having worked here since 2001; if he will use his discretion to restore their original residential status; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7516/10]

149. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding a residency application or citizenship in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 15; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7517/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The person concerned was granted permission to remain in the State for a three year period to 14 August 2010. This decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 14 August 2007. The person concerned will be required to apply for the renewal of this permission one month before her current permission expires.

150. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency or citizenship in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 15; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7518/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The person concerned was granted permission to remain in the State for a three year period to 18 April 2010. This decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 18 April 2007. The person concerned will be required to apply for the renewal of this permission one month before his current permission expires.

151. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding a stamp four in the case of persons (details supplied) in Dublin 15 while consideration takes place of their application for naturalisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7519/10]

152. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency status or naturalisation in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7520/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The person concerned was granted permission to remain in the State for a three year period to 13 May 2012. This decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 13 May 2009. The person concerned will be required to apply for the renewal of this permission one month before her current permission expires.

149 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

153. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the degree to which recent court decisions affect the application for residency in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7521/10]

154. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7522/10]

155. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency or naturalisation in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7523/10]

156. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding eligibility for residency, asylum, or naturalisation in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Louth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7524/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my detailed Reply to his recent Parliamentary Question, No. 685 of Tuesday, 6 October, 2009, in this matter. The position in the State of the person concerned is as set out in that Reply.

157. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7525/10]

158. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency, family reunification or eligibility for naturalisation in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 7; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7526/10]

159. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency or naturalisation in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7527/10]

150 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

160. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a stamp four will be updated in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7528/10]

Deportation Orders.

161. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will defer deportation and review the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 7 in the aftermath of a recent court decision in respect of administrative decisions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7529/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret to advise the Deputy that it is not possible to provide a response to his Question at this time. The information sought by the Deputy will be provided at a later date.

Citizenship Applications.

162. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency or application for citizenship in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7530/10] Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I regret that the information requested by the Deputy is not readily to hand. I will write to the Deputy as soon as it is available.

163. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding residency or citizenship in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7531/10]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The person concerned was granted permission to remain in the State for a three year period to 11 July 2010. This decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 11 July 2007. The person concerned will be required to apply for the renewal of this permission one month before her current permission expires.

International Protocols.

164. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the status of inter- departmental consultation on signing and ratifying the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; his position within that consultation; the reason for the delay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7447/10] Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Micheál Martin): I refer the Deputy to written PQ 6003/10 , answered on Thursday 4 February.

151 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Micheál Martin.]

“The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (OP-ICESCR) is intended, when it comes into force, to set up a mechanism that will make it possible for individuals or groups of individuals to submit a complaint to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in regard to alleged violations of their economic, social and cultural rights by a State Party to the Optional Protocol. It does not create any new substantive rights. Following consideration by the UN Human Rights Council, the text of the Optional Protocol was presented to the UN General Assembly, which adopted the text by consensus on 10 December 2008. Officials of this Department were actively engaged at all stages of negotiation on the Optional Protocol, in consultation with other relevant Government Departments, our EU partners, other UN member States and civil society/NGO representatives. Inter-Departmental consultations on consideration of Ireland’s signature and ratification of the Optional Protocol are continuing, with this Department playing a co-ordination role. The Optional Protocol opened for signature in New York last September. I had arranged for Ireland to be represented at the opening ceremony even though we were not in a position to sign. So far thirty one (31) States have signed. Only nine of the twenty seven EU member States have signed at this point. No State has yet ratified the Optional Protocol. The Optional Protocol can only come into force three months after the deposit with the UN Secretary- General of the tenth instrument of ratification or accession. As I have indicated previously, I can assure the Deputy that I will make every effort to ensure that the consideration of Ireland’s signature and ratification by relevant Government Departments is completed as quickly as possible.”

Social Welfare Benefits.

165. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding a farm assist application in respect of a person (details supplied) in County West- meath; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7335/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

166. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason persons (details supplied) in County Longford have been refused supplementary welfare allowance and mortgage relief; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7337/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Pension Provisions.

167. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she is satisfied that her Department is correct in its interpretation of section 100 (1) (A) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, when it states that a self-employed person has to have paid one contribution prior to reaching the age of 66 years in view of the fact that in the event of a commercial partnership deemed to have existed by her Department, it has to be accepted that where a joint bank account existed that the moneys paid represented funds belonging to the spouse, even though it may have been credited to the other spouse’s account, and in some instances

152 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers the cheques may have been signed by the spouse, therefore, the way she states that one contribution had not been paid, thus eliminating this person from their entitlement to the pension. [7315/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I am satisfied with the current interpretation of section 110 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005. As set out in legislation, a self-employed contributor is liable to pay PRSI contributions based on his or her reckonable income or reckonable emoluments. The relevant provisions impose a personal liability on the self-employed contributor to pay contributions, which cannot be satisfied by those contributions having been paid by another person. There is no provision within the social insurance system whereby contributions paid in respect of one individual can be ascribed to the contribution record of another individual.

Social Welfare Benefits.

168. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a person (details supplied) has had their lone parent allowance ceased. [7316/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

169. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if an application for household benefits in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick will be processed; and if arrears of household benefits payment will be backdated. [7317/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

170. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason for refusing an application for back to education allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Meath. [7319/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to the staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Social Welfare Appeals.

171. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding farm assist appeal in respect of a person (details supplied) County Donegal. [7321/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to industrial action by the Public Service Executive Union and the Civil Public and Services Union I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Social Welfare Benefits.

172. Deputy Darragh O’Brien asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7322/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

153 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

173. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a carer’s allowance was disallowed in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Westmeath; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7332/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

174. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a person (details supplied) in County Longford who has been here for 18 months and has refugee status will be awarded jobseeker’s allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7334/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

175. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a person (details supplied) in County Longford has not been awarded jobseeker’s allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7338/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

176. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will review the means assessment regarding a jobseeker’s allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Westmeath; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7339/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

177. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a decision on an application for child benefit (details provided) will issue in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7342/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

178. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will support the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 3. [7353/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

179. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will support a matter (details supplied). [7354/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

180. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the case of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick; if a review will be carried out; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7357/10]

154 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

181. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will support a matter (details supplied). [7363/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

182. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the case of a person (details supplied); if their child benefit will cease; if they will qualify for the compensatory payment; if this comes automatically or the way they can apply for same; if the child dependant allowance is awarded with the invalidity pension for each of the children; the age up to which it is awarded if the child is still in full-time education. [7368/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

183. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if supplementary welfare allowance will be awarded in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Wexford pending a decision on their applications for one parent family payment and child benefit; when these applications will be processed to completion; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7371/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

184. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason unemployment assistance has been awarded in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Laois; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7374/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

185. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a decision will issue on an application for non-contributory State pension in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon, and if she will make a statement on the matter.

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

186. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if a decision will be made on an application in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 9 for an exemption from illness benefit rules in order is participate in a community employment scheme of considerable rehabilitative benefit which is due to start imminently; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7387/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

187. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a person (details supplied) can surrender their lone parent and obtain full carer’s allowance. [7388/10]

155 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Social Welfare Appeals.

188. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when an appeal will be heard in relation to disability allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Mayo. [7392/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Social Welfare Benefits.

189. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if an application for invalidity will be processed in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

190. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will make a statement on the case of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. [7405/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

191. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if an application for a free travel companion pass and a companion travel pass will be processed in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. [7407/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

192. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the case of a person (details supplied) in County Wicklow; if she will have the case examined; and if she will make a statement on the matter.

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

193. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding an application for a contributory pension in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11; if the Revenue Commissioners have notified her Department of additional past payments in the past few months; if they will receive a full or partial pension when arrears payment is settled; if pension will be paid from their 66th birthday or date of application; if approximately €800 due will be deducted from pension arrears due from her Department; and if their full contribution record will be provided. [7428/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

194. Deputy Noel Ahern asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding entitlement to benefits in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 9; if rent

156 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers allowance and family income supplement will be awarded at same time as back to work scheme; and if all entitlements have been awarded to them. [7429/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Social Welfare Appeals.

195. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon will be informed of the outcome of an oral appeal for carer’s allowance. [7435/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy

Social Welfare Benefits.

196. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a person (details supplied) in Dublin 12 cannot qualify for back to education or back to work schemes despite being in receipt of a disablement benefit since 2006. [7438/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

197. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when an application for State pension in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Wexford was received in her Department; when this application will be processed to completion; when the applicant will receive payment of any entitlement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7497/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret I am unable to provide the information sought by the deputy.

198. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when an application for disability allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Wexford was received in her Department; when this application will be processed to completion; when the applicant will receive payment of any entitlement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7498/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

199. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will be approved and awarded jobseeker’s benefit. [7500/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

200. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a claim for jobseeker’s allowance will be processed in respect of a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7504/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

157 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

201. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will be approved and awarded the bereavement grant. [7505/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

202. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when an application for jobseeker’s benefit and allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Wexford was received in her Department; the status of the application; if supplementary welfare allowance will be awarded to them; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7506/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

203. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason child benefit has ceased in respect of a person (details supplied). [7507/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

204. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when one parent family allowance will be awarded in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7532/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

205. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the extent and amount of entitlement to jobseeker’s allowance or benefit in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7533/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

206. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if a person (details supplied) in County Kildare qualifies for retirement or old age pension; the expected amount of such entitlement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7534/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Social Welfare Code.

207. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if a person on one parent family allowance may obtain income from employment without loss of payment; the amount by which the payment will be affected by gradual increase in income from employment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7535/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

158 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Social Welfare Benefits.

208. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if early payment of jobseeker’s benefit or allowance will be awarded in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7536/10] Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

209. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the entitlement to family income supplement in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7537/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

210. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason for the cessation of family income supplement in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7538/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

211. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when rent support will be provided in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 15; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7544/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

212. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding an application for illness benefit in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [7557/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

213. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a person (details supplied) in County Cork did not receive child benefit for the months of December 2009 and February 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7558/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

214. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason a person (details supplied) in County Laois has not received the full adult dependant allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7560/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

215. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the amount of money paid out to persons in receipt of the widow’s pension that have previously been divorced from their deceased spouse on a year by year basis for the past five years. [7564/10]

159 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

216. Deputy John Perry asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if a person (details supplied) in County Sligo will receive a family income supplement payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7566/10]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Due to staff action currently being taken, I regret that I am unable to provide the information sought by the Deputy.

Housing Aid for the Elderly.

217. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will support the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 9. [7318/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): Under the terms of the Housing Aid for Older People Scheme, which is administered by the local authorities, grants of up to €10,500 may be available to assist older people living in poor housing conditions to have necessary repairs or improvements carried out. It is a matter for individual authorities to determine what works are eligible and to prioritise these in line with their systems of prioritisation.

Animal Welfare.

218. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if there is capital funding available from his Department for voluntarily run services for dog protection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7364/10] Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I refer to the reply to Question No. 587 of 2 February 2010.

Local Authority Housing.

219. Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the works that will be covered by remedial funding in 2010 for the refurbishment of a housing estate (details supplied) in County Tipperary; the works that are planned for that estate for the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7341/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): My Department has recently granted approval for this project and the Council may now proceed to advanced planning and tender stage. A provisional allocation of €1.5m for 2010 has been advised to the local authority to assist in undertaking remedial works at this location. The overall proposal includes the refurbishment of tenanted dwellings, the demolition of a number of existing units, the provision of a small number of new units, a new access road and site works.

Housing Grants.

220. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the grants and funding that are available for a person that wishes to re-thatch their home which has a preservation order; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7386/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): Under my Department’s Renewal or Repair of Thatch Roofs of

160 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers a House grant scheme, a grant up to €3,810, or two thirds of the approved cost, whichever is the lesser, may be payable in respect of necessary works to renew or repair the thatched roofs of houses. A higher grant of up to €5,714 may be payable where the house is situated on certain specified islands off the West and South coasts. In the case of medical card holders, a grant of up to €6,350, or up to 80% of the approved cost, may be payable in respect of houses situated on the mainland, rising to €8,252 where the house is situated on a specified off-shore island. Eligibility under the grant scheme is contingent on the house being occupied as a normal place of residence on completion of the approved works.

Criminal Prosecutions.

221. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the number of persons that have been prosecuted under the legislation implementing the nitrates directive since its enactment; the offences that gave rise to these prosecutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7413/10] Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): The Nitrates Directive is given legal effect by the European Communities (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2009, known as the ‘Nitrates Regulations’. Local authorities, acting under the general supervision of the EPA, are the competent authorities for enforcing the Nitrates Regulations. The EPA collates and publishes data on enforcement activity. To date, one prosecution was taken by Limerick County Council in 2007 and one was initiated by South Tipperary County Council in 2008. Two cases were initiated by Limerick County Council during 2009. A significant number of non-compliances are resolved without the need for criminal sanction. Where instances of non-compliance are recorded during farm inspections, the EPA has instructed local authorities to take appropriate enforcement actions. Such actions include but are not limited to, monitoring, follow-up farm inspections, issue of warning letters, issue of formal Notices and finally, prosecution.

Departmental Correspondence.

222. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will respond to correspondence for a person (details supplied) in County Cork regarding the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009. [7432/10] Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): A response to the representations made by the individual concerned will issue shortly.

Departmental Staff.

223. Deputy Seán Connick asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government when a person (details supplied) in County Wexford will commence employment with his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7450/10] Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): Under the Government’s decentralisation programme, my Department’s Headquarter Office in Wexford is expected to be completed and ready for occupation by end March 2010. Subject to this date being met, staff will move into these offices in phases during April starting firstly with staff in temporary accommodation in Wexford followed by Dublin based staff. There are almost 40 provincial based staff serving in other Departments who are also decentralising to

161 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy John Gormley.] my Department in Wexford. The phased transfer of these staff into my Department will be progressed with a view to them commencing work from April/May, 2010.

Telecommunications Services.

224. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the company (details supplied) appointed to roll out broadband here is only permitting outlets to sell broadband if the outlets agree to also sell their mobile telephones; if this is part of the agreement between the company and his Department; his views on whether this is a fair practice; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7456/10] Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The issue raised by the Deputy is purely a commercial matter for 3. It does not form part of that company’s contract with my Department in regard to the National Broadband Scheme and I therefore have no role or function in the matter.

Grant Payments.

225. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the reason REP scheme payment approval has not been forwarded to a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon who has been in scheme since May 2009. [7323/10] Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): REPS 4 is a measure under the current Rural Development Programme 2007–13 and is subject to EU Regulations which require detailed administrative checks on all applications to be completed before the first payments issue. Payments have issued to those whose applications required no further examination following the administrative checks. However queries arose on a significant number of applications, including that of the person named, in the course of the administrative checks. My Department is continuing to process applications with a view to payment as soon as possible and, in this context, will be in touch with the applicants where necessary to resolve outstanding issues.

Departmental Staff.

226. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he plans to appoint an overseeing inspector for County Roscommon at locations in which schemes and plans are held up due to the lack of an approving officer and in view of the fact that farmers in a large area of the county are awaiting overdue payments; and if he will make the necessary appointment. [7324/10] Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): As the Deputy will be aware there is a moratorium on recruitment and promotion in the public service. My Depart- ment has been making alternative arrangements to ensure the prompt processing of claims.

Grant Payments.

227. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when payment will issue in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Clare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7328/10]

162 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): My Department is currently in correspondence with the forestry consultant of the person in question in relation to certain aspects of the actual grant aid application.

228. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the number of outstanding REPS 4 payments being delayed on the basis of nitrates and phosphates compliance on a county basis in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7351/10]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): Due to industrial Action by staff in my Department, I am not in a position to provide a reply to this question.

Departmental Agencies.

229. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he has received a copy of the Flood report regarding the National Stud; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7402/10] Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): It is understood the Report, to which the Deputy refers, was carried out on behalf of the Board of the Irish National Stud Company Ltd. to investigate an internal human resource issue which arose within the Company. Human resource issues arising at the Irish National Stud are a matter for the Board of the Company. The Report to which the Deputy refers was not provided to my Department.

230. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views regarding the early retirement of a person (details supplied) from an organisation under his Department’s remit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7408/10]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): It is my understanding that the matter into which the Deputy enquires involved the resignation and not the early retirement of an employee from an organisation. Furthermore I understand that this resignation was dealt with in accordance with the terms and conditions of the employee’s contract of employment. Such internal HR issues are operational matters for the company and as such are for the Board of the relevant organisation to address.

Special Educational Needs.

231. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Education and Science the steps he will take to restore a special needs assistant that has been taken away from a school (details supplied) in County Meath; if he will confirm that he has received correspondence in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7330/10]

247. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will reply to correspondence from a person (details supplied) in County Meath; if he will reinstate the two special needs assistants to the school; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7433/10]

294. Deputy Thomas Byrne asked the Minister for Education and Science if a child (details supplied) in County Meath is entitled to the allocation of a special needs assistant from the National Council for Special Education; and if so, the hours they are entitled to receive. [7561/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 231, 247 and 294 together.

163 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.]

The Deputies will be aware that the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) is responsible, through its network of local Special Educational Needs Organisers (SENOs), for allocating resource teachers and Special Needs Assistants (SNAs) to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. 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. I can confirm that I responded to correspondence from a Deputy in relation to the pupil in question on 8th February. I also arranged for a copy of the correspondence to be sent to the NCSE. In addition, I have arranged for the details now supplied by the Deputies to be forwarded to the NCSE for their attention and direct reply.

Schools Building Projects.

232. Deputy Joe Carey asked the Minister for Education and Science the position regarding an application for major capital works in respect of a school (detail supplied) in County Clare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7349/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I can confirm to the Deputy that the school to which he refers has made an application to my Department for large scale capital funding. The application has been assessed in accordance with the published prioritisation criteria for large scale building projects and assigned a Band 2 rating. Information in respect of the current school building programme along with all assessed applications for major capital works, including the project referred to by the Deputy, are now available on my Depart- ment’s website at www.education.ie. The priority attaching to individual projects is determined by published prioritisation criteria, which were formulated following consultation with the Education Partners. There are four band ratings under these criteria, each of which describes the extent of accommodation required and the urgency attaching to it. Band 1 is the highest priority rating and Band 4 is the lowest Documents explaining the band rating system are also available on my Department’s website. The progression of all large scale building projects, including this project, from initial design stage through to construction phase will be considered in the context of my Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme. However, in light of current competing demands on the capital budget of the Department, it is not possible to give an indicative timeframe for the progression of the project at this time.

Special Educational Needs.

233. Deputy Chris Andrews asked the Minister for Education and Science the position regarding an application from a school (details supplied) in Dublin 4; if a decision to approve this application has been granted and if so, the reason for this decision. [7350/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Arrangements are being made to have the special needs assistant employed by the Board of Management of the school referred to, from September 2009 to December 2009 paid retrospectively on my Department’s payroll. The refund of any money paid by the school to the special needs assistant is a matter for the school to recoup directly from the person in question.

Schools Building Projects.

234. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Education and Science, further to

164 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Parliamentary Question No. 342 of 4 February 2010, if the tender report has been completed; if the preferred contractor has been chosen; and if so, when the contractor will be on site. [7394/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The closing date for receipt of tenders was 25th January 2010. The Design Team are currently assessing the tenders and will issue a Tender Report shortly for my Department to consider. When the tender process is complete and assuming there are no issues arising the project will progress to construction. It is envisaged that the completion contractor will be on site before Easter.

Third Level Education.

235. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in view of the review into third level education here, he will include the possibility of providing a third level education college in County Clare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7399/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): As the Deputy is aware, I have established a High Level Group to develop a new national strategy for higher education, which will examine how well Ireland’s higher education system is performing, how it ranks internationally, how well existing resources are being used and how the system should be configured to best meet the many challenges it faces over the next decade having regard to the key role it has to play in contributing to Ireland’s economic recovery. As part of this work the Group is examining the structure of the higher education system including the number and roles of institutions within it. The Strategy Group are expected to finalise their report before the summer. There are no plans to develop any new higher education institutions at this time.

Schools Building Projects.

236. Deputy Chris Andrews asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the case of a school (details supplied) in Dublin 8. [7410/10]

251. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the position of a school (details supplied) in County Dublin on the school building list; the band rating assigned to this application; the number of schools classified in the same band rating; when this project will progress to construction; if it is in an area of rapid population growth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7452/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 236 and 251 together. The school to which the Deputies refer has applied to my Department for large scale capital funding for an extension and refurbishment project. In common with all such applications, this application has been assessed againSt my Department’s published prioritisation criteria for large scale building projects. It has been assigned a Band 2 rating under these criteria. My Department currently has 693 applications with a Band 2 rating. An additional 95 Band 2 rated projects are in architectural planning. A further 11 are at tender stage and 13 are in construction. Details of these applications and projects are available on my Department’s website www.education.ie. Due to the level of demand on my Department’s capital budget, it is not possible to give an indicative timeframe for the progression of a project for the school in question at this time. In this regard, funding is not committed to any project until such a time as it appears in a capital programme to proceed to tender and construction and there is certainty that funding will be available to complete the project.

165 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.]

The Forward Planning Section of my Department has carried out a study of the country to identify the areas where, due to demographic changes, there may be a requirement for significant additional school provision at both primary and post-primary levels over the coming years. This study has been conducted using data from the Central Statistics Office, the General Regis- ter Office and the Department of Social & Family Affairs in addition to recent schools’ enrolment data. The study indicates that the requirement for additional primary provision in years 2010, 2011 and 2012 is likely to be greatest in a total of 42 locations across the country based on significant changes to the demographics of those areas. The area where the school in question is situated is not included in these locations. In the circumstances, my Department is not considering alternative provision in the area at this time particularly as a preliminary examination of its enrolments at primary level indicates a decline in excess of 100 pupils between the 2008 and 2009 school year.

School Services Staff.

237. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Education and Science if the grants paid to primary schools for secretaries and cleaners has been cut back; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7411/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I can confirm to the Deputy that there has been no reduction in the allocation provided in the Book of Estimates. In fact the allocation provides for the expected increase in enrolments at primary level. The amount of grant paid to an individual primary school for ancillary services is determined by the school’s enrolment, subject to a minimum grant in respect of schools with enrolments up to 60 and a maximum grant in the case of schools with enrolments of 500 or more. The standard rate of grant is €155 per pupil per annum. The minimum grant, therefore, is €9,300, while the maximum grant amounts to €77,500. The grant is intended to assist those schools that have not been provided with secretarial or caretaking assistance under the 1978/1979 schemes, under which certain schools receive the benefit of a full-time secretary or caretaker whose salary is fully funded by my Department. Secretaries and caretakers employed under this scheme have received a pay reduction, with effect from 1 January 2010, in accordance with the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No. 2) Act 2009. The Deputy may wish to note that Circular 40/2009 clarifies issues relating to the allocation of funding for primary schools. The circular states that capitation funding provided for general running costs and funding provided for caretaking and secretarial services may be regarded as a common grant from which the Board of Management can allocate according to its own priorities. In due course, both grant schemes will be merged. In the interim, both grants will continue to be paid according to existing timelines and calculated separately as heretofore. I have consistently said that it is my intention to streamline and rationalise the different grant schemes that provide funding to primary schools. This will ensure that school management has greater autonomy over how funding is allocated.

Departmental Correspondence.

238. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will reply to correspondence from a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7412/10]

166 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): My Department has no record of the correspondence referred to by the Deputy. If the Deputy would supply the relevant contact details a response will issue in due course.

Higher Education Grants.

239. Deputy Charlie O’Connor asked the Minister for Education and Science if additional resources will be provided to County Dublin Vocational Education Committee to allow it to deal with the backlog with higher education grant applications; if he will give assurances in this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7414/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Co. Dublin VEC has not sought approval from my Department for additional staffing resources to deal with the processing of higher education grants. In that regard, the Deputy is of course aware of the Government decision to implement a recruitment and promotion moratorium in the public sector. In respect of Vocational Education Committees, including County Dublin VEC, positions other than teacher and SNA posts in schools, and teacher equivalents that are directly providing tuition to pupils in schools, in special programmes or in an adult and further education, are compre- hended by this decision. Work prioritisation across different functions, and how available staff are deployed to execute those functions, are matters for the management of County Dublin VEC.

School Staffing.

240. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Education and Science the process and criteria for appointing a deputy principal, assistant principal and special duties posts in greenfield site schools within the vocational education committee sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7416/10]

241. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Education and Science the position regarding teachers that transfer to a new greenfield site school within the vocational education committee sector, thus losing their special duties and assistant principal posts and therefore are not deemed eligible for deputy principal positions in the new greenfield site school due to the fact that special duties and assistant principal posts are a prerequisite for eligibility; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7417/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 240 and 241 together. The selection and appointment procedures for posts of responsibility in VEC schools are agreed between the respective school management bodies, the teacher unions and my Depart- ment and are set out in circular letters issued by my Department. The filling of promotion posts in VEC schools is primarily a matter for the Chief Executive Officer of the VEC scheme in accordance with these agreed procedures. I will arrange for officials in my office to provide the relevant circular letters to the Deputy directly.

Schools Building Projects.

242. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Education and Science if he is committed to a new multidenominational primary school for the Dublin 6 and 8 catchment areas; his views on whether there is an shortage of places for children in multidenominational schools in Dublin south city, especially Dublin 6 and 8 in view of the fact that demand is increasing. [7418/10]

167 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

243. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Education and Science the position regarding a proposed new multidenominational primary school in Dublin 8; when this school will be built; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7419/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 242 and 243 together. As the Deputy may be aware, in September 2008 I announced a review of the procedures for the establishment of new primary schools under the Commission on School Accommodation. It is expected that the review of procedures for recognising primary schools will be completed and revised arrangements will be in place within a two year time frame. In the interim it is not proposed to recognise any new primary schools, except in areas where the increases in pupil numbers cannot be catered for in existing schools and which require the provision of new schools. This means that new schools will not be established for reasons unrelated to demographic growth in areas where there is already sufficient school accommodation or where increases can be catered for by extending existing school accommodation. The Forward Planning Section of my Department has carried out a study of the country to identify the areas where, due to demographic changes, there may be a requirement for significant additional school provision at both primary and post-primary levels over the coming years. This study has been conducted using data from the Central Statistics Office, the General Regis- ter Office and the Department of Social & Family Affairs in addition to recent schools’ enrolment data. The study indicates that the requirement for additional primary provision in years 2010, 2011 and 2012 is likely to be greatest in more than 40 identified locations across the country based on significant changes to the demographics of those areas. This information was circulated to all existing school Patrons who were invited to bring forward proposals for the expansion of existing schools or indeed to put themselves forward as Patron for any new primary school, should it be required. The requirement for the establishment of new schools will of course be lessened where it is possible to expand and extend existing schools in those areas. On foot of this no concerns were raised regarding accommodation issues by the existing Patrons in the Dublin 6/8 area.

State Examinations.

244. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason a person (details supplied) in County Kildare cannot be facilitated in seeking to have assistance with their forthcoming leaving certificate examination; if there is an appeal mechanism available; if so, the procedure for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7425/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The State Examinations Com- mission has statutory responsibility for operational matters relating to the certificate examinations including organising the holding of examinations and determining procedures in places where examinations are conducted including the supervision of examinations. I can inform the Deputy that the Commission operates a scheme of Reasonable Accommodations in the Certifi- cate examinations. Applications for such accommodations are submitted by schools on behalf of their students. In view of this I have forwarded your query to the State Examinations Com- mission for direct reply to you.

Schools Recognition.

245. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason a school (details supplied) in County Kildare has not received unrestricted recognition in view of the fact that the catchment area of the school has seen an increase in the number of primary

168 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers gaelscoileanna in the past number of years and that there is a need for such a school in the area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7426/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The school to which the Deputy refers applied to my Department for permanent recognition in October 2008 which was the 2008/09 school year. When it applied for temporary recognition initially, the school supported its application with a projected enrolment of 232 pupils for the 2008/09 school year. The actual enrolment was 105 pupils. Its enrolment in the current school year is understood to be 140. This compares with a projected enrolment from the school of 271 pupils. The growth of the school is, therefore, considerably slower than expected given that it has a number of feeder schools from which it can attract pupils. However, the Department recognises that the potential is there for a long term viable entity and it extended the school’s temporary recognition for a further three years to allow it the opportunity to develop its enrolments further on this basis.

Schools Building Projects.

246. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Education and Science if a meeting will be arranged with his Department officials to meet with the board of management of a school (details supplied) in County Meath to address issues in the school. [7431/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I met with the school to which the Deputy refers last year and the school authority is aware that it will be provided with a new school building. In this regard, the proposed project has a Band 1 rating, which is the highest possible priority rating under my Department’s published prioritisation criteria for large scale building projects and the project will proceed as soon as the funding is available. With regard to issues with the existing building, under legislation, Boards of Management are responsible for health, safety and welfare in their schools. The Department assists primary schools in this by annually devolving funding to address Health and Safety issues. Boards of Management can decide themselves what to use this funding for. Schools can also apply for Summer Works Scheme funding each year to address Health and Safety issues. Under this Scheme, schools identify and prioritise their most urgent needs. The school in question applied for car parking facilities under the 2010 SWS. In all of the circumstances, it is not my intention to arrange for a further meeting with the school at this time.

Question No. 247 answered with Question No. 231.

Grant Payments.

248. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Education and Science the grants available to assist in funding the cost of installing a lift or hoist for disabled access to a swimming pool in a school (details supplied) in Dublin 4; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7439/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The swimming pool to which the Deputy refers is privately owned and managed and my Department has no role to play in resourcing such facilities.

Teaching Qualifications.

249. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason the Teaching Council refuses to recognise the City and Guilds further and adult education teachers certification; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7443/10]

169 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): As the Deputy may be aware, the recognition of teacher qualifications is now a matter for the Teaching Council, the body with responsibility for establishing and maintaining standards in the teaching profession. The Teaching Council considers applications to be registered as a teacher in the further education sector under Regulation 5 of the Teaching Council Registration Regulations, which I approved in November 2009. For the purpose of registration under regulation 5, the Council requires that an applicant have a primary degree or equivalent which is considered suitable. There is currently no general requirement for a further and adult education teacher’s certification from the City and Guilds or any other awarding body for the purposes of registration. The Council has set out a requirement in Regulation 5 that applicants wishing to register under that regulation will have to have an accredited teacher education qualification from 1 April 2013. The Council is currently consulting with the 3rd level colleges and other relevant stakeholders with a view to setting down a framework and criteria for the accreditation of a teacher education qualification for teachers in the FE sector. I would recommend that persons with queries as to recognition of qualifications should make direct contact with the Council.

Schools Building Projects.

250. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Education and Science the position regarding an application for funding in respect of building works at a school (details supplied) in County Limerick; when he expects to make an announcement of progress on the matter; when the project will proceed to tender and construction; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7451/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I can confirm that my Depart- ment has received an application for major capital funding from the school to which the Deputy refers. The application has been assessed in accordance with the published prioritisation criteria for large scale building projects and assigned a band rating of 2. Information in respect of the current school building programme along with all assessed applications for major capital works, including the project referred to by the Deputy, are now available on my Department’s website at www.education.ie. The priority attaching to individual projects is determined by published prioritisation criteria, which were formulated following consultation with the Education Partners. There are four band ratings under these criteria, each of which describes the extent of accommodation required and the urgency attaching to it. Band 1 is the highest priority rating and Band 4 is the lowest Documents explaining the band rating system are also available on my Department’s website. The progression of all large scale building projects, including this project, from initial design stage through to construction phase will be considered in the context of my Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme. However, in light of current competing demands on the capital budget of the Department, it is not possible to give an indicative timeframe for the progression of the project at this time.

Question No. 251 answered with Question No. 236.

Grant Payments.

252. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will arrange to have a home tuition payment processed in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7454/10]

170 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Payment of grant aid under the Home Tuition Scheme is made by my Department upon receipt of a completed claim form. The person to whom the Deputy refers, submitted a claim form that was received by my Department on the 21St January 2010. Payment is expected to issue shortly.

School Staffing.

253. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who took up their first appointment in primary schools between 1 September 2009 and the end of December 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7457/10]

254. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who took up their first appointment in primary schools who were appointed in a permanent capacity during the period 1 September 2009 to the end of December 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7458/10]

255. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who took up their first appointment in primary schools who were appointed in a temporary capacity during the period 1 September 2009 to the end of December 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7459/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 253 to 255, inclusive, together. The information requested by the Deputy is being compiled and will be forwarded to him.

256. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who retired in each of the past ten calendar years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7460/10]

257. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who retired with 40 or more years service in each of the past ten calendar years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7461/10]

258. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who retired with between 35 and 40 years service in each of the past ten calendar years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7462/10]

259. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers who retired with less than 35 years service in each of the past ten calendar years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7463/10]

260. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers holding a special duties post of responsibility who retired since the introduction of the moratorium on promotion within the public service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7464/10]

261. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers holding the post of assistant principal who retired since the introduction of the moratorium on promotion within the public service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7465/10]

171 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

262. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of deputy principals at primary level who retired since the introduction of the moratorium on promotion within the public service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7466/10]

263. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of deputy principals at primary level who retired during each of the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7467/10]

264. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of principal teachers at primary level who retired since the introduction of the moratorium on promotion within the public service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7468/10]

265. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of principal teachers at primary level who retired during each of the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7469/10]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 256 to 265, inclusive, together. The information sought by the Deputy is being compiled and will be sent to him as soon as possible.

266. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with five years or less teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7470/10]

267. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between six and ten years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7471/10]

268. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between ten and 15 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7472/10]

269. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between 16 and 20 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7473/10]

270. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between 21 and 25 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7474/10]

271. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between 26 and 30 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7475/10]

272. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between 31 and 35 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7476/10]

273. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with between 35 and 40 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7477/10]

172 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

274. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary teachers with more than 40 years teaching experience employed in the education system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7478/10]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 266 to 274, inclusive, together. The information requested by the Deputy is being compiled and will be forwarded to him.

School Patronage.

275. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science his views on the view expressed in the OECD Review of Migrant Education in Ireland report, published in December 2009, that in a society that is becoming increasingly heterogenous, the practice of patron bodies of education begins to look anachronistic; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7479/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The OECD Review of Migrant Education, Ireland Country Report, is one of a series of reports arising from the OECD’s thematic review of migrant education. The report considers five key “policy orientations” that Ireland should consider in providing an “inclusive, high quality education for all students” againSt a background of changing inward migration patterns, particularly between 2000 and 2008. One of the key policy orientations is “Access to Quality Education”. Both strengths and challenges are identified. In relation to Ireland’s patronage model, the report comments that “it continues to work well for the majority of students” and notes the challenges associated with the increasing diversity and pluralism of Irish society. In this regard, it notes the emergence of the new model of patronage at primary level offered by the Community National Schools, and its potential to address some of these challenges. It also acknowledges the work being undertaken by the Commission on School Accommodation in relation to future requirements for school provision. My Department is considering the recommendations in the OECD report within the context of its commitment to provide inclusive, high quality education for all students.

School Enrolments.

276. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number or primary schools with an enrolment of fewer than 50 pupils on a county basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7480/10]

277. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary schools with an enrolment of between 50 and 99 pupils on a county basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7481/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 276 and 277 together. The information sought by the Deputy is set out on the table. This information which relates to the 2008/09 school year is provided through the annual census of primary schools. The data for the current school year (2009/2010) is currently being compiled by my Department and the final outcome will be available later in the year.

173 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] Schools with 50-99 pupils

No. Schools Total Pupils County

1 64 Galway City 5 348 Limerick City 6 414 Carlow 6 481 Dun Laogh/Rathdown 6 506 Cork City 7 585 Dublin South 8 658 Dublin Fingal 11 676 Leitrim 11 863 Kildare 13 938 Longford 15 1,123 Louth 17 1,375 County Waterford 18 1,424 Dublin City 19 1,471 Laoise 21 1,513 Kilkenny 21 1,553 Monaghan 22 1,549 Wicklow 23 1,720 Westmeath 24 1,883 Sligo 27 2,207 Offaly 28 2,005 Tipperary SR 28 2,187 Meath 29 2,156 Roscommon 29 2,287 Wexford 30 2,119 Cavan 31 2,279 Clare 33 2,418 Tipperary NR 33 2,466 County Limerick 44 3,177 Kerry 54 3,949 Donegal 55 3,858 Mayo 74 5,506 County Galway 88 6,342 County Cork

Sum: 837

School Staffing.

278. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of personnel who were paid at the untrained rate for primary substitute teaching during each month from September 2009 to January 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7482/10]

279. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of teachers employed as substitutes during each month from September 2009 to January 2010 who were paid at the trained rate for primary substitute teaching; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7483/10] 174 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

280. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of retired teachers employed as substitutes during each month from September 2009 to January 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7484/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 278 to 280, inclusive, together. The information requested by the Deputy is being compiled and will be forwarded to him.

Teaching Qualifications.

281. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the numbers expected to graduate as primary teachers from all the colleges of education here in the calendar years 2010, 2011 and 2012. [7485/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The level of student intake to the Colleges of Education is determined annually by my Department and it takes account of the supply of, and demand for, primary teachers. The estimated graduate numbers from the Bachelor of Education and Post Graduate courses in the State funded Colleges of Education are detailed below. The decision to provide the post graduate course is generally made on an annual basis depending on the teacher supply situation so it is not possible to include estimated graduates for the course for 2012.

Year B.Ed Post Grad

2010 1,071 497 2011 1,090 200 2012 1,024 not available

Hibernia College, a private on-line college, also offers a post graduate conversion course and it estimates that it will have 660 graduates in 2010. Data for 2011 and 2012 is not yet available. The intake into the State funded Colleges of Education in future years will continue to be kept under review by my Department to ensure that there is an adequate supply of teachers.

Computerisation Programme.

282. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the arrangements that have been made to provide technical support to schools in the area of information, communication and technology in relation to the recent investment by his Department in teaching laptops in primary schools; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7486/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The Deputy will be aware that the recent funding provided to primary schools to purchase teaching computers and digital projectors is a first step in investment in ICT in schools as outlined in the “Smart Schools = Smart Economy” Report published last November. Schools currently procure their own technical support as required, and some form of technical support is generally included in the purchase of PCs. For example, schools are currently required to use the Framework Agreement for the purchase of laptops and the price quoted under the Framework includes a three year onsite warranty which provides next business day ‘onsite’ support. The scoping of a technical support solution for all schools is complex due to the broad variety of ICT infrastructure components and configurations deployed across schools at the moment. The question of putting in place such a solution is part of the recommendations of the “Smart Schools = Smart Economy” Report. A number of areas are currently being explored in my department including reviewing the experience of the VECs in this area. The Smart Schools 175 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] Report also recommends the setting up of an ICT in Schools Steering Group, which I am in the process of setting up, to advise on the implementation of the recommendations of the Report. The issue of a technical support solution is one of the areas it will advise on including the possibility of trialling a centralised technical support solution within the 78 post-primary schools involved in the 100 Mbts Broadband pilot project.

School Enrolments. 283. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of section 29 appeals taken in each of the past five years at primary level; the reason for these appeals; the outcome of these appeals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7487/10] 284. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of section 29 appeals taken in each of the past five years at second level; the reason for these appeals; the outcome of these appeals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7488/10]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I propose to take Questions Nos. 283 and 284 together. Section 29 of the Education Act 1998, provides parents with an appeal process where a Board of Management of a school, or a person acting on behalf of the Board, expels, suspends for a period greater than 20 days, or refuses to enrol a student. In these circumstances, the school is obliged to inform parents of their right under Section 29 of Education Act 1998 to appeal that decision. Where the school is established or maintained by a VEC an appeal shall lie in the first instance to the VEC and thereafter to the Secretary General of my Department. Only where an appeal under Section 29 is upheld can the Secretary General of my Department direct a school to enrol or re-instate a pupil. The information requested by the Deputy is included in the attached table, which details the total number of appeals admitted by the Department for each of the last five years at primary and second level, the reason for the appeals and the outcome of these appeals.

Appeals in 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005

Post-Primary 266 214 188 181 216 Primary 124 171 195 85 84

Total 390 385 383 266 300

Refusal to Enrol

Post Primary

Refusal to Withdrawn Local Facilitator Upheld at Not Upheld at Totals enrol Resolution Resolution Hearing Hearing

2005 18 39 13 31 36 137 2006 25 8 3 30 27 93 2007 27 3 9 44 25 108 2008 16 16 22 30 45 129 2009 41 19 33 42 68 203

Total 127 85 80 177 201 670

176 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Primary Sector

Refusal to Withdrawn Local Facilitator Upheld at Not Upheld at Totals enrol Resolution Resolution Hearing Hearing

2005 7 10 15 24 14 70 2006 27 5 9 20 13 74 2007 35 17 48 28 60 188 2008 33 15 32 28 42 150 2009 30 12 14 19 40 115

Total 132 59 118 119 169 597

Expulsions

Post primary

Expulsion Withdrawn Local Facilitator Upheld at Not Upheld at Totals Resolution Resolution Hearing Hearing

2005 9 1 6 10 42 68 2006 9 2 9 21 43 84 2007 17 0 3 11 40 71 2008 3 2 2 19 46 72 2009 13 0 4 7 32 56

Total 51 5 24 68 203 351

Primary

Expulsion Withdrawn Local Facilitator Upheld at Not Upheld at Totals Resolution Resolution Hearing Hearing

2005 4023312 2006 200237 2007 001225 2008 1005612 2009 300238

Total 10 0 3 14 17 44

Suspensions

Post Primary

Suspension Withdrawn Local Facilitator Upheld at Not Upheld at Totals Resolution Resolution Hearing Hearing

2005 3004411 2006 101024 2007 203229 2008 1126313 2009 002237

Total 7 1 8 14 14 44

177 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.]

Primary

Suspension Withdrawn Local Facilitator Upheld at Not Upheld at Totals Resolution Resolution Hearing Hearing

2005 000112 2006 100124 2007 000112 2008 022329 2009 100001

Total 2226618

Special Educational Needs.

285. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of special classes for children with autism at primary level on a county basis; the name and address of each school making such provision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7489/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): As the Deputy is aware the establishment of the current national network of autism-specific special classes in schools has been a key educational priority in recent years. In excess of 380 classes have now been approved around the country at primary and post primary level, including many in special schools. The NCSE will continue to establish additional special classes as required. I have arranged for a detailed breakdown of these classes to be forwarded directly to the Deputy.

School Staffing.

286. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of untrained personnel employed in a teaching capacity in primary schools on a permanent or temporary basis; the details of communications between his Department and those schools on these employments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7490/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The information requested by the Deputy is being compiled and will be forwarded to him.

Disadvantaged Status.

287. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of DEIS one primary schools on a county basis; the name and address of each school; the enrolment of each school; the additional funding and support provided to each school under the DEIS scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7491/10]

288. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of DEIS two primary schools on a county basis; the name and address of each school; the enrolment of each school; the additional funding and support provided to each school under the DEIS scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7492/10]

289. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of DEIS post-primary schools on a county basis; the name and address of each school; the enrolment of 178 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers each school; the additional funding and support provided to each school under the DEIS scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7493/10]

290. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of DEIS rural post-primary schools on a county basis; the name and address of each school; the enrolment of each school; and the additional funding and support provided to each school under the DEIS scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7494/10] Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Seán Haughey): I propose to take Questions Nos. 287 to 290, inclusive, together. DEIS (Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools) is my Department’s action plan for educational inclusion, and provides for a standardised system for identifying levels of disadvantage and an integrated School Support Programme (SSP). The process of identifying schools for participation in DEIS, was managed by the Educational Research Centre (ERC) on behalf of my Department and supported by quality assurance work co-ordinated through the Depart- ment’s regional offices and the Inspectorate. Some 881 schools have been included under the plan. These comprise 679 primary schools and 202 second-level schools. Since DEIS was launched in 2005, considerable progress has been made in relation to the roll out of supports to participating schools. These supports include:

• reduced pupil teacher ratios in primary schools in urban areas with most disadvantage.

• allocation of administrative principals on lower figures than generally apply in primary schools in urban areas.

• additional capitation funding based on levels of disadvantage.

• additional funding for schools books.

• access to the School Meals Programme

• access to numeracy/literacy supports and measures at primary level.

• access to Home School Community Liaison or Rural Coordinator services.

• access to the School Completion Programme.

• enhanced guidance counselling provision at post primary level.

• access to planning supports.

• provision for school library and librarian support in post primary schools with most disadvantage — access to the Junior Certificate School Programme and Leaving Certificate Applied

• access to a range of professional development supports.

The information sought in relation to the names and addresses of each of the schools in DEIS and their enrolments is set out in the attachments. The enrolment totals given are the totals for the school year 2008/2009. This information may also be accessed at www.education.ie. The Deputy should be aware that it is not the practice of my Department to publish the resources provided to individual schools without the consent of the schools in question.

179 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

08490N Urban St Clares Primary School Cavan, Co. Cavan Cavan 476 17326B Urban S N Naomh Feidhlim Cavan, Co. Cavan Cavan 180 20277I Urban St Michaels NS Cootehill, Co. Cavan Cavan 190 19559L Urban Chriost Ri Cloughleigh, Ennis, Co. Clare, Clare 258 05940D Urban Scoil Ursula Blackrock, Co. Cork Cork 146 14198D Urban Naomh Eoin Easpal Mayfield, Co. Cork Cork 201 16680O Urban Scoil Colmcille Blarney St, Cork Cork 164 17024I Urban Scoil Na Croise Naofa Mahon, Cork Cork 207 17045Q Urban St Patricks B N S Ballyhooley Road, Cork Cork 234 18153B Urban S N Padraig Naofa C Dillons Cross, Cork Cork 254 18154D Urban S N Padraig Naofa Dillons Cross, Cork Cork 153 18217B Urban Scoil Padre Pio N S Churchfield, Cork City Cork 209 18587L Urban Scoil Mhuire Banrion Mayfield, Cork Cork 242 18786R Urban Scoil Iosagain Farranree, Cork Cork 467 19426P Urban S N Mharcuis B An Gleann, Corcaigh Cork 79 19427R Urban S N Bhreanndain C An Ghleann, Corcaigh Cork 96 19714U Urban Mhuire Ar Chnoc Haoine Knocknaheeny, Cork Cork 359 19908K Urban Gaelscoil Mhachan Carraig Dubh, Corcaigh Cork 189 19909M Urban Gaelscoil Peig Sayers C/O Na Piarsaigh C.L.G., Parklands, Cork 89 Corcaigh, 20036J Urban North Presentation Gerald Griffin Street, Cork City. Cork 228 Primary School 20038N Urban Scoil Aiseiri Chriost Farranree, Cork. Cork 392 20140E Urban Scoil Mhuire Fatima North Monastery, Cork Cork 249 19438W Urban Scoil Colmcille Senior Wyattville, Ballybrack, Co. Dublin, Dublin 170 19641T Urban St Colmcille Jun NS Wyattville, Ballybrack, Co. Dublin, Dublin 194 19840C Urban Holy Family School Dunedin Park, Monkstown, Co. Dublin 110 Dublin, 19979K Urban St Kevins N S Sallynoggin, Co. Dublin Dublin 121 20202A Urban Balbriggan Educate Hamlet Lane, Moylaragh, Balbriggan, Dublin 263 Together Co. Dublin 20218P Urban Archbishop Mc Quaid NS Loughlinstown, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin 141 Dublin, 20282B Urban Bracken Educate Castlelands, Balbriggan, Co. Dublin, Dublin 169 Together NS 20302E Urban Thornleigh Avenue Applewood Village, Swords, Co. Dublin 27 Educate Together NS Dublin, 00752A Urban Central Senior Mxd N S Marlboro St, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 187 01795A Urban Central Infs School Marlboro St, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 132 11776C Urban St Laurence O Toole Seville Place, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 61 Junior Boys 12448N Urban Gardiner Street Convent Gardiner Street, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 303 15056L Urban S N San Vinseann Cailin North William St, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 219 15816I Urban St Vincents Inf Boys North William Street, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 125 17110B Urban Naomh Lorcan O Plas Seibhil, Baile Atha Cliath 1 Dublin 1 83 Tuathail 17881G Urban Scoil Ui Chonaill Nth Richmond Street, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 175 19831B Urban Scoil Chaoimhin Sraid Mhaoilbhride, Baile Atha Cliath Dublin 1 52 1 19946S Urban Rutland Street N S Lower Rutland Street, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 102

180 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

20228S Urban St Laurence O Toole 49 Seville Place, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 105 Girls School 18341C Urban SN Louise De Marillac C Drumfin Rd, Ballyfermot, Dublin 10, Dublin 10 222 18342E Urban SN Louise De Marillac Ballyfermot, Dublin 10 Dublin 10 194 18585H Urban SN Banrion Na Ballyfermot, Dublin 10 Dublin 10 159 Naingea11 18843D Urban Bainrion Na N-Aingal 2 Ballyfermot Upper, Dublin 10 Dublin 10 139 19661C Urban St Gabriels NS Dominican Campus, Ballyfermot, Dublin 10 230 Dublin 10, 19662E Urban St Michaels NS Dominican Convent, Ballyfermot, Dublin 10 314 Dublin 10, 19663G Urban St Raphaels NS Dominican Convent, Ballyfermot, Dublin 10 229 Dublin 10, 19766Q Urban Scoil Iosagain/Mhuire Mount La Salle, Ballyfermot, Dublin Dublin 10 180 10, 19767S Urban Scoil Mhuire/Seosamh Mount La Salle, Ballyfermot, Dublin Dublin 10 178 10, 20092T Urban St Ultans NS Cherryorchard, Dublin 10 Dublin 10 164 20139T Urban Inchicore NS Sarsfield Road, Inchicore, Dublin 10, Dublin 10 215 18137D Urban S N Naomh Feargal Finglas West, Dublin 11 Dublin 11 142 19015R Urban St Josephs G N S Barry Avenue, Finglas West, Dublin Dublin 11 202 11, 19197D Urban St Kevins B N S Barry Avenue, Finglas North-West, Dublin 11 188 Dublin 11, 19208F Urban Holy Spirit B N S Silloge Rd, Baile Munna, Atha Cliath Dublin 11 387 11, 19209H Urban SN An Spioraid Naiomh Sillogue Rd, Ballymun, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 323 C 19431I Urban St Josephs Jnr Balcurris, Ballymun, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 151 19489Q Urban SN Naomh Finnin Glenties Park, Rivermount, Finglas Dublin 11 223 South, Dublin 11 19546C Urban St Oliver Plunkett N S St Oliver Plunkett NS, St Helenas Dublin 11 135 Drive, Finglas, Dublin 11 19583I Urban St Josephs Senior N S St Josephs Senior NS, Balcurris, Dublin 11 185 Ballymun, Dublin 11 19619D Urban St Malachys NS Rivermount, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 157 19929S Urban St Brigids Senior Girls Finglas West, Dublin 11 Dublin 11 202 20029M Urban St Brigids Infant N S Wellmount Avenue, Finglas West, Dublin 11 225 Dublin 11, 20220C Urban Gaelscoil Uí Earcáin Bóthar Uí Mhaoilíosa, Fionnghlas, Dublin 11 84 Baile Átha Cliath 11, 16964F Urban Scoil Mhuire Ogh 1 Loreto College, Crumlin Rd, Dublin Dublin 12 157 12, 17603B Urban Scoil Iosagain Aughavannagh Road, Crumlin, Dublin Dublin 12 117 12, 17683C Urban Muire Og 2 Loreto Con Crumlin Road, Dublin 12 Dublin 12 286 18386B Urban Marist National School Clogher Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 264 19764M Urban Our Lady Of Wayside N Bluebell, Inchicore, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 122 S 19889J Urban Scoil Colm Armagh Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 168 20014W Urban St Agnes N S Armagh Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 320 19545A Urban Corduff N S Corduff, Blanchardstown, Dublin 15, Dublin 15 351 19601H Urban St Philip The Apostle Mountview, Blanchardstown, Dublin Dublin 15 291 Junior N S 15, 19605P Urban Scoil Nais Mhuire Sois Blakestown, Mulhuddart, Dublin 15, Dublin 15 264 19636D Urban St Patricks Senior School Corduff, Blanchardstown, Dublin 15, Dublin 15 314

181 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

19643A Urban St Philips Senior N S Mountview, Clonsilla, Dublin 15, Dublin 15 309 19694R Urban Scoil Mhuire Sin Blakestown, Mulhuddart, Dublin 15, Dublin 15 275 19850F Urban Ladyswell N S Ladyswell, Mulhuddart, Dublin 15, Dublin 15 597 19490B Urban Scoil Mhuire Ballyboden, Dublin 16 Dublin 16 209 17104G Urban St Francis Junior Priorswood, Dublin 17 Dublin 17 199 National School 19454U Urban Darndale NS Junior Our Lady Immac Jun NS, Darndale, Dublin 17 240 Malahide Road, Dublin 17 19524P Urban Our Lady Immac Sen N Our Lady Immac Sen NS, Darndale, Dublin 17 258 S Dublin 17, 19668Q Urban St Francis Senior N S Priorswood, Dublin 17 Dublin 17 205 19913D Urban St Josephs NS Macroom Road, Bonnybrook, Dublin Dublin 17 360 17, 11578V Urban City Quay Boys N S City Quay, Dublin 2 Dublin 2 147 19896G Urban Scoil Caitriona Na Baggot St, Dublin 2 Dublin 2 85 Mbraithre 19509T Urban Scoil Nano Nagle Bawnoge, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 328 19510E Urban Talbot Senior NS Bawnoge, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 282 19569O Urban Neillstown N S St Peter Apostle NS, Neillstown, Dublin 22 281 Clondalkin, Dublin 22 19575J Urban St Marys Junior N S Rowlagh, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 234 19642V Urban St Peter Apostle Sen NS Neillstown, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 293 19647I Urban St Marys Sen N S Rowlagh, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 242 19707A Urban St Ronans N S Deansrath, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 479 19743E Urban St Bernadettes Junior N Quarryvale, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 239 S 19785U Urban St Bernadettes Senior N Quarryvale, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 237 S 19464A Urban SN Naomh Colmcille Homelawns, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 43 19543T Urban Scoil N An Croi Ro Killinarden, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 286 Naofa 19577N Urban Scoil Iosa Scoil Nais Iosa, Tymon North, Dublin 24 72 Tallaght, Dublin 24 19613O Urban Scoil Cnoc Mhuire Sin Knockmore Ave, Killinarden, Tallaght, Dublin 24 150 Dublin 24 19652B Urban An Chroi Ro Naofa Sois Killinarden, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 298 19702N Urban St Thomas Junior N S Jobstown, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 474 19765O Urban St Thomas Senior N S Jobstown, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 390 19775R Urban Scoil Cnoc Mhuire Junior Knockmore Ave, Killinarden, Tallaght, Dublin 24 165 Dublin 24 19782O Urban St Brigids N S Brookfield, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 354 19834H Urban St Aidans NS Brookfield, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 342 19872P Urban Scoil Chaitlin Maude Cnoc Mhuire, Tamhlacht, Baile Atha Dublin 24 209 Cliath 24, 20173T Urban St Annes Primary School Fettercairn, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 412 19981U Urban St Marys N S Windsor Ave, Fairview, Dublin 3, Dublin 3 253 03917V Urban Naomh Padraig Boys Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4, Dublin 4 105 15253N Urban St Patricks Girls NS Cambridge Road, Dublin 4 Dublin 4 138 17732M Urban Scoil Chiarain Ascal Ui Choileain, Domhnach Dublin 5 89 Cairne, Baile Atha Cliath 5, 18968A Urban St Malachys B N S Edenmore, Raheny, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 209 18969C Urban St Eithnes Senior G N S Edenmore, Raheny, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 137 19037E Urban St Monicas N S Edenmore, Raheny, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 87

182 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

19297H Urban Cromcastle Green B N S Kilmore Rd West, Artane, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 269 19298J Urban Scoil Nais Ide Cailini Kilmore Road West, Artane, Dublin Dublin 5 199 5, 19935N Urban Scoil Eoin Greendale Road, Dublin 5 Dublin 5 253 20064O Urban Our Lady Of Consolation Collins Ave East, Donnycarney, Dublin 5 218 NS Dublin 5, 20281W Urban St Benedict’s & St Mary’s Grange Park, Raheny, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 214 NS 05933G Urban Presentation Primary Georges Hill, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 212 School 09932B Urban Stanhope St Convent Stanhope Street, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 370 16695E Urban Scoil Na Mbrathar North Brunswick Street, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 186 16988T Urban Christ The King B N S Cabra, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 99 17464N Urban Fionnbarra Naofa Cabra West, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 108 17465P Urban Dominican Convent Girls Cabra, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 182 17466R Urban St Catherines Infant Cabra, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 134 School 19895E Urban Scoil Mhuir S Iosaf St Marys Place, Plas Mhuire, Off Dublin 7 114 Dorset Street, Dublin 7 20005V Urban Scoil Plas Mhuire St Marys Place, Dorset Street, Dublin Dublin 7 94 7, 20035H Urban St Gabriels N S Cowper Street, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 244 00743W Urban Mater Dei Primary Basin Lane, James Street, Dublin 8, Dublin 8 256 School 07546J Urban Goldenbridge Convent Goldenbridge, Inchicore, Dublin 8, Dublin 8 251 13611D Urban Presentation Convent NS Warrenmount, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 317 14556D Urban St Endas Primary School St Endas Primary School, Whitefriar Dublin 8 150 St, Dublin 8, 16786H Urban St Brigids Convent N S The Coombe, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 220 18477E Urban Scoil Na Mbrathar Francis Street, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 151 18519R Urban Scoil Seamus C B S James Street, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 123 19933J Urban Scoil Treasa Naofa Petrie Road, Donore Avenue, Dublin Dublin 8 137 8, 20104A Urban St Audoens NS Cook Street, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 151 18910P Urban Bantiarna Na Mbuanna B Baile Munna, Dublin 9 Dublin 9 183 18911R Urban Bantiarna Na Mbuanna Baile Munna, Dublin 9 Dublin 9 187 G 19242F Urban Our Lady Of Victories Ballymun Road, Dublin 9 Dublin 9 223 Infant N S 19302U Urban SN Na Maighdine Muire Ballymun, Dublin 9 Dublin 9 177 B 19303W Urban Na Maighdine Mhuire Virgin Mary, Girls National School, Dublin 9 147 Ballymun, Dublin 9 01013N Urban Scoil Croi Iosa Presentation Road, Galway Galway 156 04515G Urban Scoil An Linbh Iosa St Francis St, Galway Galway 158 12250P Urban Scoil Mhuire Primary Sch Dublin Rd, Tuam, Co. Galway, Galway 178 16943U Urban Niochlas N S An Cladach, An Gaillimh Galway 364 17782E Urban S N Bride Naofa Sean Tallamh, Gaillimh Galway 385 19225F Urban Scoil Michil Naofa Baile Ban, Gaillimh Galway 178 19226H Urban Scoil Na Trionoide Naofa Muirbheach, Gaillimh Galway 449 20042E Urban Scoil An Chroi Naofa Ballinasloe, Co. Galway Galway 316 16635J Urban Curragh Camp B N S Curragh Camp, Co. Kildare Kildare 88 16636L Urban Curragh Camp G N S Curragh Camp, Co. Kildare Kildare 108 19747M Urban Scoil Bhride NS Portlaoise, Co. Laois Laois 654

183 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

00570R Urban Mhuire Naofa Cailini Mhuire Naofa, Limerick Limerick 114 06936R Urban St JohNS Convent Cathedral Place, Limerick City Limerick 300 15320C Urban St Michaels NS CBS Grounds, Sexton Street, Limerick 74 Limerick, 16715H Urban St John The Baptist Boys Downey Street, Pennywell, Limerick, Limerick 45 NS 16910F Urban Scoil Iosagain Sraid Seasnain, Limerick Limerick 288 17445J Urban Scoil Lile Naofa Kileely, Limerick Limerick 70 17737W Urban Our Lady Queen Of Janesboro, Limerick Limerick 190 Peace School 17941V Urban St Munchins G N S Ballynanty, Limerick Limerick 202 17942A Urban Scoil Mhainchin Buach Bothar Siolbroin, Limerick Limerick 97 18177P Urban Scoil Aine Naofa Rath Caola, Co. Luimni Limerick 263 18653V Urban Scoil Naomh Iosef Rathkeale, Co. Limerick Limerick 121 19372S Urban South Hill N S South Hill, Limerick Limerick 65 19667O Urban Our Lady Of Lourdes N Rosbrien, Limerick Limerick 214 S 19830W Urban Corpus Christi N S Moyross, Limerick Limerick 205 19931F Urban Gaelscoil Sheoirse Clancy, An Cnoc Theas, Luimneach, Limerick 123 20018H Urban Maria King Presentation Sexton Street, Limerick Limerick 266 Primary 20184B Urban Galvone NS Kennedy Park, Limerick City Limerick 135 20185D Urban St Marys Boys NS Island Road, Limerick Limerick 115 00856M Urban Scoil Naomh Micheal Longford, Co. Longford Longford 161 18178R Urban St Josephs Convent Longford, Co. Longford Longford 394 20101R Urban The Sacred Heart Granard, Co. Longford Longford 105 Primary N.S. 14651U Urban Castletown Rd Convent Castletown Rd, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Louth 213 16469S Urban St Nicholas Monastery Philip Street, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Louth 213 NS 19215C Urban S N Ard Mhuire C Ballsgrove, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Louth 430 19246N Urban S N An Tslanaitheora B Ard Easmuinn, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Louth 157 19247P Urban S N An Tslanaitheora C Ard Easmuinn, Dun Dealgan, Co. Louth 170 Louth, 19479N Urban Rathmullan N S Rathmullen, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Louth 389 19673J Urban St Josephs N S Avenue Road, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Louth 439 19678T Urban St Pauls Senior NS Rathmullen, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Louth 318 20163Q Urban S.N Eoin Baiste Fatima, Castletown, Dundalk, Co. Louth 226 Louth 18506I Urban S N Naomh Padraig B Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 121 20275E Urban Scoil Iosa Convent Hill, Ballina, Co. Mayo, Mayo 269 19713S Urban Arden Boys NS Arden View, Tullamore, Co. Offaly, Offaly 153 19910U Urban Sligo Project School Abbey Quarter, Sligo Sligo 94 18345K Urban S N Iosef Naofa Cor An Bhile, Roscrea, Co. Tipperary, Tipperary 159 19645E Urban St Oliver Plunketts NS Heywood Rd, Clonmel, Co. Tipperary, Tipperary 497 19511G Urban St Saviours NS Ballybeg, Waterford City Waterford 321 07722D Urban St Peters N S Snr Athlone, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 118 16639R Urban SN Deaghan O Ceallaigh Athlone, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 65 18405C Urban S N Phoil Naofa Athlone, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 172 08221J Urban St Senans National Sch Templeshannon, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford 511 Wexford, 19739N Urban Scoil Mhuire Coolcotts Scoil Mhuire, Coolcotts, Co. Wexford, Wexford 532

184 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

20003R Urban St Aidans Parish School Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford Wexford 867 07246U Urban Sisters Of Charity N S Ravenswell, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Wicklow 248 18464S Urban Naomh Peadar N S Bray, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 82 19477J Urban Holy Family B N S Askea, Carlow, Co. Carlow, Carlow 348 19478L Urban Holy Family G N S Askea, Carlow, Co. Carlow, Carlow 394 20295K Urban Carlow Town Educate c/o Unit 5, Shamrock Business Park, Carlow 25 Together NS Graiguecullen, Co. Carlow 07315N Urban Holy Family Snr Ennis, Co. Clare Clare 370 17957N Urban Ennis Convent Inf N S Ennis, Co. Clare Clare 236 20041C Urban Convent Of Mercy Kilrush, Co. Clare Clare 283 National School 20086B Urban Ennis Educate Together Gort Road, Ennis, Co. Clare, Clare 206 NS 01197D Urban Strawberry Hill B N S Sundays Well, Cork Cork 134 02707F Urban Sundays Well G N S Cork, Co. Cork Cork 146 12473M Urban Greenmount Monastery Scoil Muire Na Ngras, Greenmount, Cork 292 NS Co. Cork, 13031I Urban St Josephs Convent N S Rathluirc, Co. Cork Cork 220 13696O Urban St Vincents Convent N S St Marys Road, Cork Cork 367 14000C Urban Scoil Naomh Mhuire N Mhuire An Oileain, Sharman Cork 127 Crawford St, Cork, 17105I Urban Muire Gan Smal C Glasheen, Cork Cork 204 17639W Urban Scoil Na Mbraithre Mitchelstown, Co. Cork Cork 226 17993R Urban Scoil Mhuire Gan Smal B Glasheen, Cork Cork 283 18237H Urban Maria Assumpta G N S Ballyphehane, Cork Cork 184 18238J Urban Maria Assumpta Jnr Inft Ballyphehane, Cork Cork 93 18292P Urban Gaelscoil An Teaghlaigh Baile Feithean, Co. Chorcai Cork 231 Naofa 18377A Urban Iosef Naofa Fermoy, Co. Cork Cork 64 18734V Urban Realt Na Maidine Ballyphehane, Cork Cork 128 19588S Urban Scoil Naomh Therese Bishopstown, Cork Cork 44 19977G Urban Bandon Boys NS Bandon, Co. Cork Cork 197 16054M Urban St Patricks N S Murlog, Lifford, Co. Donegal, Donegal 132 16821G Urban Clochar Padraig Naofa Carndonagh, Co. Donegal Donegal 206 17945G Urban Scoil Naomh Chaitriona Ballyshannon, Co. Donegal Donegal 115 18076J Urban SN Muire Gan Smal Leithbhearr, Co. Dun Na Ngall Donegal 115 18605K Urban Scoil Naomh Padraig Carndonagh, Co. Donegal Donegal 174 Boys 20054L Urban Scoil Eoghan Moville, Co. Donegal Donegal 211 20235P Urban Letterkenny Educate Ballyraine Halls, Ballyraine, Donegal 108 Together NS Letterkenny, Co. Donegal 05600C Urban Clochar San Dominic Dunlaoghaire, Co. Dublin Dublin 205 19497P Urban Scoil Mhuire Shankill, Co. Dublin Dublin 308 19515O Urban SN Naomh Treasa Baile Brigin, Co. Ath Cliath Dublin 476 19960M Urban St Johns N S Ballybrack, Co. Dublin Dublin 122 20274C Urban Esker Educate Together c/o Adamstown Castle NS, Dublin 204 NS Adamstown, Co. Dublin , 20303G Urban Lucan East Educate Kishogue Cross, Off Griffeen Avenue, Dublin 88 Together NS Lucan, Co. Dublin 20307O Urban Skerries Educate c/o 23 The Parade, Kellys Bay, Dublin 34 Together NS Skerries, Co. Dublin 19938T Urban St Josephs Tivoli Road, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin 147 Dublin,

185 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

18682F Urban St Canices B N S Finglas, Dublin 11 Dublin 11 421 18683H Urban St Canices G N S Finglas, Dublin 11 Dublin 11 391 20059V Urban Mother Of Divine Grace Holy Faith NS, Ferndale Ave, Dublin 11 403 Ballygall, Dublin 11 16983J Urban S N Naomh Cillin Bluebell, Inchicore, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 20 17355I Urban Muire Na Dea Coirle G Mourne Road, Drimnagh, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 176 17356K Urban Muire Na Dea Coirle Inf Mourne Road, Dublin 12 Dublin 12 183 19669S Urban Lady Of Good Counsel Mourne Rd, Drimnagh, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 169 NS 20308Q Urban Belmayne Educate Balgriffin Park, Belmayne, Dublin 13, Dublin 13 15 Together NS 19922E Urban Our Ladys N S St Columbanus Road, Milltown, Dublin 14 83 Dublin 14, 19939V Urban Scoil Naisiunta An Dea Whitehall Road, Churchtown, Dublin Dublin 14 198 Aoire 14, 20186F Urban Castaheany Educate Ongar Village, Dublin 15 Dublin 15 356 Together NS 20241K Urban Scoil Choilm Community Porterstown Road, Porterstown, Dublin 15 154 NS Dublin 15, 19723V Urban Queen Of Angels Wedgewood, Dundrum, Dublin 16, Dublin 16 318 Primary School 19566I Urban Our Lady Queen Of Queen Of Apostles NS, Clonburris, Dublin 22 525 Apostles Clondalkin, Dublin 22 19502F Urban Scoil Aenghusa Jun NS Balrothery, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 193 19576L Urban S N Aenghusa Scoil N Aenghusa Sin, Balrothery, Dublin 24 170 Tallaght, Dublin 24 19582G Urban St Maelruains N S Kilclare Avenue, Jobstown, Tallaght, Dublin 24 77 Dublin 24 19646G Urban Scoil Santain Bothar Na Habhann Mor, Tamhlacht, Dublin 24 336 Ath Cliath 24, 19878E Urban Ballycragh N S Ballycragh, Firhouse, Tallaght, Dublin Dublin 24 506 24 19950J Urban St Dominics N S Tallaght, Dublin 24 Dublin 24 204 18726W Urban S N Seosamh Na Fairview, Dublin 3 Dublin 3 182 Mbrathar 19774P Urban St Josephs Mxd N S East Wall, Dublin 3 Dublin 3 185 16567S Urban St Brigids Convent N S Haddington Road, Dublin 4 Dublin 4 278 17279S Urban Scoil Muire Haddington Road, Dublin 4 Dublin 4 146 18360G Urban Scoil Bhreandain Coolock, Dublin 5 Dublin 5 177 18361I Urban S N Caitriona C Coolock, Dublin 5 Dublin 5 220 18362K Urban S N Caitriona Naionain Coolock, Dublin 5 Dublin 5 243 19920A Urban St John Of God N S Kilmore Road, Artane, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 233 19924I Urban Harolds Cross N S Harolds Cross, Dublin 6W Dublin 6 207 16989V Urban Christ The King G N S Cabra, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 95 17459U Urban Christ The King I G Cabra, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 59 20091R Urban St Peters NS Phibsboro, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 371 17083B Urban S N Muire Gan Smal B Inchicore, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 274 17893N Urban Sancta Maria C B S Synge St, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 110 19430G Urban Scoil An Tseachtar Laoch Bothar Bhaile Munna, Baile Munna, Dublin 9 200 Baile Atha Cliath 9, 20015B Urban Gaelscoil Bhaile Munna 187 Bothar Choultrai, Baile Munna, Dublin 9 183 Baile Atha Cliath 9, 17221K Urban SN Colmcille An Caislean An Gearr, Gaillimh Galway 82 17282H Urban Scoil Na Mbraithre Tuam, Co. Galway Galway 221

186 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

18042P Urban Presentation Convent Tuam, Co. Galway Galway 349 19401W Urban S N Caitriona Sois Renmore, Co. Galway Galway 414 19468I Urban SN Caitriona Sinsear SN Caitriona Sinsear, Renmore, Co. Galway 404 Galway, 19795A Urban Tirellan Heights N S Headford Road, Galway Galway 493 13530D Urban Scoil Mhuire Tobar Mui Doire, Traili, Co. Chiarrai, Kerry 413 16703A Urban Scoil Na Mbraithre An Daingean, Co. Chiarrai Kerry 69 16871V Urban S N An Chroi Naofa Traighli, Co. Chiarrai Kerry 394 20013U Urban Gaelscoil Lios Tuathail Lios Tuathail, Co. Chiarrai Kerry 103 20158A Urban Tralee Educate Together Collis Sandes House, Killeen Oakpark, Kerry 114 Tralee, Co. Kerry 12747A Urban Kildare Monastery N S Kildare, Co. Kildare Kildare 351 15599D Urban St Brigids Primary School Kildare, Co. Kildare Kildare 545 16705E Urban Scoil Phadraig Naofa Lana Eoin Naofa, Ath-I, Co. Chill Kildare 287 Dara, 18288B Urban Scoil Mhichil Naofa Athy, Co. Kildare Kildare 743 19452Q Urban Scoil Mhuire Newbridge, Co. Kildare. Kildare 474 19550Q Urban Ballymany Junior NS Newbridge, Co. Kildare Kildare 425 17108O Urban St JohNS Infants N S Kilkenny, Co. Kilkenny Kilkenny 209 20011Q Urban St JohNS Senior NS Ballybough Street, Kilkenny. Kilkenny 199 18822S Urban St Marys N.S. Summerhill, Carrick-On-Shannon, Co. Leitrim 86 Leitrim, 00851C Urban Presentation Convent Ballymakenny Road, Drogheda, Co. Louth 365 Louth, 17059E Urban Scoil Na Mbraithre SN Geata An Domhnaigh, Droichead Louth 427 Atha, Co. Lui, 17949O Urban S N Padraig Naofa B Bothar Brugha, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Louth 453 18098T Urban S N Bhride C Bothar Brugha, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Louth 399 18347O Urban S N San Nioclas Nicholas St, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Louth 122 19892V Urban Gaelscoil Dhun Dealgan Muirtheimhne Mor, Dun Dealgan, Co. Louth 194 Lu, 20084U Urban Gaelscoil Bheal An Atha Corrai Mhuireann, Beal An Atha, Co. Mayo 77 Mhaigh Eo, 17969U Urban S N Mhuire An Uaimh, Co. Na Mi Meath 304 19476H Urban St Oliver Plunkett NS Navan, Co. Meath Meath 552 20180Q Urban Scoil Naomh Eoin Clonmagadden Valley, Windtown, Meath 315 Navan, Co. Meath 16202B Urban Castleblayney Convent Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 126 16319W Urban Castleblaney Con Infts Castleblaney, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 167 17686I Urban Scoil Mhuire B Castleblaney, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 129 03220F Urban Mercy Primary School Birr, Co. Offaly Offaly 239 12370C Urban St Brendans Monastery Birr, Co. Offaly Offaly 236 13118U Urban Clara Convent N S Clara, Co. Offaly Offaly 211 16928B Urban S N Naomh Philomena Tullamore, Co. Offaly Offaly 154 18406E Urban S N Proinsias Naofa Clarach, Co. Ua Bhfailghe Offaly 217 18524K Urban S N Naomh Brighde Tullamore, Co. Offaly Offaly 199 Buach 18797W Urban S N Naomh Seosamh Arden View, Tullamore, Co. Offaly, Offaly 346 13198V Urban St Annes Con N S Castlerea, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 155 19980S Urban St Attractas N S Ballaghaderreen, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 268 17277O Urban St Edwards N S Ballytivnan, Sligo Sligo 168 19985F Urban Our Lady Of Mercy N S Pearse Road, Sligo Sligo 501 20019J Urban Holy Family School Tubbercurry, Co. Sligo Sligo 156

187 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

01594N Urban St Johns Roscrea, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 160 16729S Urban St Peter And Paul Clonmel, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 275 16979S Urban Scoil Colmcille Templemore, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 93 17731K Urban S N Iosef Naofa Templemore, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 151 18435L Urban Sacred Heart Primary Newline, Roscrea, Co. Tipperary, Tipperary 258 School 15046I Urban St Stephens N S Waterford, Co. Waterford Waterford 471 16732H Urban Scoil Naomh Seosamh Dungarvan, Co. Waterford Waterford 141 18462O Urban Scoil Lorcain BNS Ballytruckle, Waterford Waterford 344 18509O Urban An Teaghlaigh Naofa Clochar Na Trocaire, Port Lairge Waterford 319 18689T Urban Our Lady Of Mercy Military Road, Waterford Waterford 296 Senior P.S. 19947U Urban Mount Sion Cbs N S Barrack Street, Waterford Waterford 346 19953P Urban St Marys NS Dungarvan, Co. Waterford Waterford 303 19955T Urban Presentation Primary Slievekeale Road, Waterford Waterford 466 School 20219R Urban St Pauls B N S Lisduggan, Waterford Waterford 260 20073P Urban St Marys NS Gracepark Rd, Athlone, Co. Westmeath 391 Westmeath, 20188J Urban Mullingar Educate Rathgowan, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath 210 Together Westmeath, 03633H Urban S N Bun Cloidi B Bun Cloidi, Co. Loch Gorman Wexford 288 11361T Urban Faythe Convent St John Of Gods Convent, Wexford Wexford 276 11986N Urban Convent Of Mercy Pairc An Chinneideach, Loch Garman Wexford 473 12372G Urban Michael St N S Michael St, New Ross, Co. Wexford, Wexford 134 16741I Urban Scoil Na Mbraithre New Ross, Co. Wexford Wexford 209 17457Q Urban Nmh Ioseph N S New Ross, Co. Wexford Wexford 375 02276E Urban An T Inbhear Mor B N S Arklow, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 168 19508R Urban St Fergals Junior Ballywaltrim, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Wicklow 281 National School 19654F Urban St Fergals Senior NS Ballywaltrim, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Wicklow 297 20278K Urban Newtownmountkennedy Newtownmountkennedy, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 248 Primary School 17127S Rural St Josephs NS Hacketstown, Co. Carlow Carlow 128 17096K Rural S N Nmh Fhingin Garryhill, Muinebheag, Co. Carlow Carlow 16 18265M Rural Bhride N S Ard Duach, Carlow, Co. Carlow Carlow 24 17555Q Rural Scoil Naomh Abban Crettyard, Carlow, Co. Carlow, Carlow 64 06998Q Rural S N Tulach A Mhile Corlough, Belturbet, Co. Cavan Cavan 59 08143P Rural S N Mhuire Muileann Iarainn, Swanlinbar, Co. Cavan 75 Cavan 01356U Rural Kilnaleck Mixed N S Kilnaleck, Co. Cavan Cavan 64 17479D Rural Scoil Mhuire Lacken, Ballinagh, Co. Cavan Cavan 78 19363R Rural Mullahoran Central N S Kilcogy, Via Longford, Co. Cavan Cavan 135 14339S Rural Achad An MeasaS N Achadh Easa, Achadh Easa, An Chorr Cavan 54 Dubh, Co. Cabhan 12848G Rural Doonaha N S Kilkee, Co. Clare Clare 13 15968I Rural Baltard N S Baltard, Doonbeg, Kilrush, Co. Clare Clare 6 15221A Rural Annagh N S Miltown Malbay, Co. Clare Clare 68 10191P Rural S N Na Coradh Mullach, Inis, Co. Clare Clare 17 20078C Rural SN Realt Na Mara Chapel St, Kilkee, Co. Clare Clare 110 03928D Rural Mullach N S Mullach, Ennis, Co. Clare Clare 57 17020A Rural Quilty NS Quilty, Ennis, Co. Clare Clare 40

188 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

08241P Rural Scropul N S Mullagh, Ennis, Co. Clare Clare 16 20245S Rural Ennistymon NS Ennistymon, Co. Clare Clare 144 20313J Rural Mol an Óige Ennistymon, Co. Clare Clare 75 13976U Rural St Matthias N S Church Road, Ballydehob, Co. Cork Cork 51 17112F Rural Ballyhea N S Ballyhea, Rathluirc, Co. Cork Cork 121 13543M Rural Derrinacahara N S Dunmanway, Co. Cork Cork 89 19501D Rural Cahermore New Central Cahermore, Co. Cork Cork 71 S 17011W Rural Mocomhog N S Cappaboy, Kealkil, Bantry, Co. Cork Cork 29 17281F Rural Togher N S Dunmanway, Co. Cork Cork 52 19525R Rural Mhichil Naofa Ballinakilla, Bere Island, Bantry, Co. Cork 20 Cork 14303U Rural S N Cleire Oilean Chleire, An Sciobairin, Co. Cork 12 Chorcai 09815U Rural Tullaslease Mixed N S Rathluirc, Co. Cork Cork 21 14065H Rural Sherkin Island N S Baltimore, Co. Cork Cork 13 19989N Rural Scoil Mhuire Na Trocaire Cill Na Mullach (Buttavant), Co. Cork 190 Chorcai 20049S Rural Ringaskiddy Lower Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork. Cork 92 Harbour N S 07101R Rural Inchiclough N S Bantry, Co. Cork Cork 25 19507P Rural Scoil Chaitigheirn Na Haorai, Beanntrai, Co. Chorcai Cork 89 20004T Rural Scoil An Croi Ro Naofa Castletownbere, Co. Cork. Cork 206 04268P Rural Clochar Na Toirbhirte Doneraile, Co. Cork Cork 117 11262R Rural Druimne N S Rathluirc, Co. Cork Cork 50 14227H Rural Kilcoe NS Skibbereen, Co. Cork Cork 66 15729N Rural Rathmullen N S Rathmullen, Co. Donegal Donegal 80 18131O Rural S N Muire Gan Smal Ard Aratha, Co. Dun Na Ngall Donegal 35 16836T Rural Naomh Bridhid Glenmakee, Carndonagh, Co. Donegal Donegal 77 17828C Rural Scoil Adhamhnain Rathbhoth, Leithbhearr, Co. Dhun na Donegal 155 nGall 19518U Rural S N Naomh Baoithin Sc Naomh Baoithin, St Johnston, Donegal 161 Lifford, Co. Donegal 17018N Rural Scoil Phadraig Dobhar, An Bun Beag, Leitirceanainn, Donegal 97 Co. Dhun na nGall 07626H Rural S N An Iorball Riabaigh Baile Ui Ghormain, Lethbhearr, Tir Donegal 40 Chonaill 07143K Rural Monreagh N S Monreagh, Carrigans Lifford, Co. Donegal 24 Donegal 14704P Rural Murroe National School Murroe, Dunfanahy, Co. Donegal Donegal 20 16349I Rural S N An Droim Mor An Droim Mor, Killygordon, Co. Donegal 156 Donegal 18766L Rural Scoil Cholmcille Dubhlin Riabach, Carraig Airt, Co. Donegal 72 Dhun na nGall 18421A Rural SN Dun Ceannfhaolaidh Dun Ceannfhaolaidh, Co. Donegal Donegal 80 18446Q Rural Scoil Naomh Mhuire Ceann Mhalanna, Ballygorman Donegal 72 Lifford, Co. Donegal 15955W Rural SN Arainn Mhor I Arainn Mor, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 50 16384K Rural SN Arainn Mhor II Arainn Mhor, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 11 16603T Rural S N An Chillin An Cillin, Inver, Co. Donegal Donegal 31 14631O Rural Scoil Cholmchille Malin, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 74 19228L Rural S N Naomh Brid Na Dunaibh, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Donegal 80 Dhun na nGall 10062E Rural Creeslough N S Creeslough, Co. Donegal Donegal 20

189 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

09748I Rural Glenmaquin No 2 N S Knockbrack, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal Donegal 19 19343L Rural S N Dhubhthaigh Anagaire, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Dhun Donegal 144 na nGall 15554E Rural Gortnacart N S Gortnacart, Ardara, Co. Donegal Donegal 39 16142J Rural S N Min Na Manrach An Clochan Liath, Leitir Ceanainn, Donegal 7 Co. Dhun na nGall 17598L Rural SN An Leinbh Iosa Coxtown, Carrigans, Co. Donegal Donegal 72 17328F Rural Scoil Roisin An Clochan Liath, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 62 17564R Rural S N An Choimin Clochan, Leithbhearr, Co. Dhun na Donegal 58 nGall 19310T Rural Scoil Naomh Earnan Baile An Tsratha, Co. Donegal Donegal 92 16823K Rural Min A Ghabhann N S Lettermacaward, Donegal Donegal 22 17503U Rural S N Adhamhnain Luinneach, Doiri Beaga, Co. Dhun na Donegal 130 nGall 18286U Rural S N Na Hacrai Ailt An Chorrain, Leitirceanainn, Co. Donegal 83 Dhun na nGall 19252I Rural S N Umlach Carrigart, Co. Donegal Donegal 86 17704H Rural S N Fhionnain Baile Chonaill, An Falcarrach, Co. Donegal 181 Dhun na nGall 18295V Rural S N Min An Aoire An Charraig, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 17 17130H Rural Scoil Naomh Dubhthach Machaire Ui Rabhartaigh, Gort A Donegal 56 Choirce, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Dhun na nGall 17729A Rural Scoil Naomh Proinnseas Magherabeg, Manorcunningham, Donegal 60 Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, 18241V Rural Scoil Naomh Cholmcille Drumman, Ramelton, Co. Donegal Donegal 90 16820E Rural SN Baile Nua An Phobail Newtowncunningham, Co. Donegal Donegal 206 19491D Rural Scoil Mhuire Rathmealltain, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 173 19009W Rural Craanford N S Craanford, Co. Donegal Donegal 30 19685Q Rural Scoil Chartha Naofa Chill Chartha, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 134 16279N Rural Scoil Choluim Ballyheerin, Fanad, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal 24 Donegal, 04809A Rural Scoil An Aingil An Cheididh, Burtonport, Leitir Donegal 37 Choimheadai Ceanainn, Co. Dhun na nGall, 14194S Rural Scoil Cholmcille An Tearmann, Co. Dun na nGall Donegal 105 15532R Rural Croaghross N S Portsalon, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal Donegal 35 18517N Rural Scoil Mhuire Dristearnain, Gleneely Po Lifford, Co. Donegal 73 Donegal 17721H Rural Scoil Treasa Naofa Malainn, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 92 15208I Rural S N Na Sraithe Moire Min A Labain, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Donegal 45 Dhun na nGall 18611F Rural S N Na Carraige Dun Na Ngall, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 111 18086M Rural Holy Trinity NS Dunfanaghy, Co. Donegal Donegal 42 17822N Rural Scoil Bhrighde Min A Chladhaigh, Gort A Choirce, Donegal 24 Co. Dhun na nGall 19912B Rural Scoil Mhuire Glenties, Co. Donegal Donegal 133 13563S Rural S N Chill Coinnigh Cill Choinnigh, Glenties, Co. Donegal Donegal 23 17447N Rural S N Crannaighe Buidhe Crannog Bui, Ardara, Co. Donegal Donegal 32 18219F Rural SN Chonaill Machaire Chlochair, Bun Beag, Co. Donegal 92 Dhun na nGall 16837V Rural S N Duchoraidh Duchoraidh, Co. Dhun na nGall Donegal 24 16471F Rural St Davadogs N S Tamney, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal Donegal 24 14502D Rural Scoil Mhuire B&C Doire Beaga, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Donegal 128 Dhun na nGall

190 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

13755E Rural Gartan N S Gartan, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal Donegal 12 16829W Rural S N Loch An Iubhair Anagaire, Leitir Ceanainn, Tir Donegal 62 Chonaill 05164I Rural Scoil Naomh Cholmcille Oilean Thorai, An Bhun Bhig, Co. Donegal 8 Dhun na nGall 18710H Rural SN Na Croise Naofa Dunfanaghy, Co. Donegal Donegal 31 18151U Rural S N Mhuire Baile An Ngalloglach, Letterkenny, Donegal 174 Co. Donegal 18114O Rural S N Naomh Eighneach Diseart Eighnigh, Buncrannach, Co. Donegal 75 Dun Na Ngall 19614Q Rural Naomh Bodain Culdaff, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 86 16375J Rural Frosses N S Frosses, Inver, Co. Donegal Donegal 84 17549V Rural S N Ceathru Caol Kerrykeel, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 93 18371L Rural Scoil Mhuire An Craosloch, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal 115 Donegal 16138S Rural Raphoe Central N S Raphoe, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 179 17469A Rural Scoil Cuilm Cille Ballindrait, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 29 18250W Rural S N Baile Mor Dunfanaghy PO, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal 18 Donegal 17552K Rural Scoil Bhrighde Porthall, Lifford, Co. Donegal Donegal 31 01733B Rural Ardara Mixed N S Ardara, Co. Donegal Donegal 13 17553M Rural S N Taodhbhog An Clochan, Leifearr, Co. Dhun na Donegal 52 nGall 16995Q Rural S N Naomh Colmchille Drumoghill NS, Manorcunningham, Donegal 70 Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, 17837D Rural Scoil Mhuire Pettigo, Co. Donegal Donegal 57 18652T Rural S N An Chaiseal Gleann Cholmcille, Co. Dhun na Donegal 77 nGall 17716O Rural St Riaghans NS Drimnacrosh, Kilraine P.O., Co. Donegal 38 Donegal 19756N Rural St Conals Narin, Portnoo, Co. Donegal Donegal 92 03294L Rural S N Caiseal Na Gcorr Gort A Choirce, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Donegal 22 Dhun na nGall 16671N Rural S N Cnoc Na Naomh Gort A Choirce, Leitir Ceanainn, Co. Donegal 80 Dhun na nGall 16850N Rural St Garvan’S N.S. Drum Halla, Rathmaolain, Donegal 22 Letterkenny, Co. Donegal 16880W Rural Scoil Naomh Colmchille Craigtown, Carndonagh, Co. Donegal Donegal 73 19693P Rural Mary Queen Of Ireland Toberburr, Co. Dublin Dublin 63 NS 17770U Rural S N Naomh Colmain Carna, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 16 13927H Rural Inishbofin N S Inishbofin, Co. Galway Galway 21 18121L Rural S N Mhuire Carna, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 39 11261P Rural Scoil Mhuire An Tuairin, Beal An Daingin, Co. Na Galway 86 Gaillimhe 13699U Rural S N Colmcille Lettermore, Co. Galway Galway 26 13416F Rural S N Leitir Meallain Leitir Meallain, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 59 12502Q Rural S N Eanna Roundstone, Co. Galway Galway 34 16982H Rural S N Ath Eascrach Chuain Beal Atha Na Sluagh, Co. Na Galway 19 Gaillimhe 14420B Rural S N Naomh Padraig Tully, Renvyle, Co. Galway Galway 49 17689O Rural S N Tir An Fhiaidh Leitir Mor, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 59 18608Q Rural S N Muire Gan Smal Cladach Dubh, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 48 14724V Rural Scoil Ronain Oilean Tra Bhan, Leitir Mor, Gaillimh Galway 32 19932H Rural SN Mhic Dara An Ceathru Rua, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 192

191 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

17574U Rural S N Naomh Ciarain Cill Chiarain, Conamara, Co. Na Galway 27 Gaillimhe 11290W Rural S N Muire Gan Smal Camas, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 25 13174H Rural St Columbas N.S. Inishturk, Co. Galway Galway 7 17660N Rural S N Naomh Treasa Caiseal, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 36 13952G Rural S N Bhride Leitir Caladh, Lettermore, Co. Galway Galway 22 13621G Rural S N Muire Letterfrack, Co. Galway Galway 68 09833W Rural S N Leitirgeis Leitirgeis N S, Rinn An Mhaoil, Co. Galway 23 Na Gaillimhe 10591I Rural S N An Ard Mhoir Carna, Conamara, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 53 18441G Rural Scoil Naomh Chuan Cill Iomair, Beal Atha Na Sluagh, Co. Galway 31 Na Gaillimhe 18211M Rural S N Ciarain Naofa Cill Liathan Newbridge, Ballinasloe, Galway 20 Co. Galway 19818J Rural Creggs Central N S Creggs, Via Roscommon, Co. Galway Galway 72 14421D Rural S N Ard Aird Thiar, Carna, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 33 11373D Rural S N Mhuire Turlach Beag, Rosmuc, Co. Na Galway 37 Gaillimhe 17463L Rural S N Briocain An Gort Mor, Rosmuc, Co. Na Galway 34 Gaillimhe 13528Q Rural SN Oilean Droim Leitir Mor, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 10 13951E Rural S N Leitir Mucu Camas, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 9 19290Q Rural Ballyconeely N S Clifden, Co. Galway Galway 41 13821O Rural S N na Naomh Uile Cleggan, Co. Galway Galway 37 19973V Rural Scoil Mhuire Clifden, Co. Galway Galway 210 17095I Rural S N Na Cealltraighe Kinclare, Cealltrach Ballinasloe, Co. Galway 43 Galway 17488E Rural SN An Aill Bhreach Baile Conaola, Connamara, Co. Na Galway 25 Gaillimhe 17289V Rural S N Caomhain Inis Oirthir, Arainn, Gaillimh Galway 25 17655U Rural S N Caladh Na Muc Ros Cathail, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 39 18514H Rural S N Choilm Chille Baile Na Habhann, Co. Na Gaillimhe Galway 156 20199O Rural S N Uachtar Árd Oughterard, Co. Galway Galway 223 20211B Rural Claregalway Educate Cloonbaggen Rd., Claregalway, Co. Galway 66 Together NS, Galway 20280U Rural Newtown NS Newtown, Abbeyknockmoy, Tuam, Galway 76 Co. Galway, 19483E Rural S N Dar Earca Ballyhearney, Valentia, Co. Kerry Kerry 63 08687J Rural S N Muire Gan Smal Na Corra, Cathair Saibhin, Co. Kerry 34 Chiarrai 18414D Rural S N Gleann Beithe Glenbeigh, Co. Kerry Kerry 84 16851P Rural Ballybunion B N S Ballybunion, Co. Kerry Kerry 48 19805A Rural Ballyduff Central Ballyduff, Tralee, Co. Kerry Kerry 107 11419B Rural Scoil Bhreanainn Portmagee, Co. Kerry Kerry 42 12875J Rural Douglas National School Killorglin, Co. Kerry Kerry 48 17915U Rural Freastogail Mhuire Mxd Killahan, Abbeydorney, Co. Kerry Kerry 26 08251S Rural Scoil Naomh Micheal SNeem, Co. Kerry Kerry 66 15978L Rural Curraheen Mxd N S Glenbeigh, Co. Kerry Kerry 48 17161S Rural Kiltallagh N S Kiltallagh, Castlemaine, Co. Kerry Kerry 37 16702V Rural Sc Mhuire Na Mbraithre Caherciveen, Co. Kerry Kerry 87 13233U Rural S N Naomh Ioseph Doon Road, Ballybunion, Co. Kerry Kerry 104 16744O Rural Boheshill Mxd Glencar, Co. Kerry Kerry 43

192 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

13542K Rural Cahirciveen Convent Cahirciveen, Co. Kerry Kerry 86 18283O Rural Scoil Mhuire Sc Mhuire BroSNach, Tra Li, Co. Kerry 65 Ciarrai 05348S Rural Scoil Eoin Tahilla, Sneem, Co. Kerry Kerry 24 16456J Rural Scoil Naisiunta Eirc Baile An Mhoraigh, Baile Na Ngall, Kerry 51 Tra Li, Co. Chiarrai 12820H Rural Scoil Realt Na Mara Killorglin, Co. Kerry Kerry 112 19425N Rural Ballyroe Central N S Athy, Co. Kildare Kildare 49 13165G Rural Kilberry N S Athy, Co. Kildare Kildare 115 18449W Rural St Conleths N S Derrinturn, Carbury, Co. Kildare. Kildare 276 16311G Rural Graig Na Manach Buac Graigenamanagh, Co. Kilkenny Kilkenny 77 17224Q Rural S N Muire Gan Smal Graigenamanagh, Co. Kilkenny Kilkenny 174 17692D Rural Sraid Bhaile Boys N S Sraid Bhaile, Co. Laois Laois 101 16951T Rural S N Na Craoibheleithe Drumkeeran, Co. Leitrim Leitrim 18 14898I Rural Drumeela N S Carrigallen Po, Co. Leitrim, Via Cavan Leitrim 26 16474L Rural Carrigallen N S Carrigallen, Co. Leitrim Leitrim 135 20203C Rural S N Naomh Sheosamh Mohill, Co. Leitrim Leitrim 215 18139H Rural S N Naomh Padraig Tearmon Spencer Harbour, Carrick- Leitrim 29 On-Shannon, Co. Leitrim 17125O Rural Differeen N S Manorhamilton, Co. Leitrim Leitrim 37 15116D Rural Ardvarney Mxd N S Dromahair, Co. Leitrim Leitrim 35 18741S Rural Faitima N S Cluana, Carrick On Shannon, Co. Leitrim 62 Leitrim 19365V Rural Achadh Na Sileann Achadh Na Sileann, Cora Droma Leitrim 56 Ruisc, Co. Liatroma 17593B Rural Scoil Naomh Mhuire Cnoc Ui Coileain, Abbeyfeale, Co. Limerick 34 Limerick 17293M Rural Scoil Ioseph Naofa Ballyorgan, Kilfinane, Co. Luimni Limerick 9 16713D Rural Scoil Na Mbraithre Doon, Co. Limerick Limerick 53 14305B Rural Ballylanders N S Kilmallock, Co. Limerick Limerick 94 20128O Rural St Matthews Mixed N.S Ballymahon, Co. Longford Longford 210 05115S Rural S N An Leana Mor An Leana Mor, Co. Longford Longford 67 16665S Rural St Marys Mixed N S Drumlish, Longford, Co. Longford Longford 149 19279F Rural S N Naomh Treasa Clontumpher, Ballinalee, Co. Longford 244 Longford 13320P Rural Fermoyle Mixed N S Fermoyle, Lanesboro, Co. Longford Longford 99 20124G Rural St Marys N.S Edgeworthstown, Edgeworthstown, Longford 372 Co. Longford 18001B Rural S N Naomh Lorcan Omeath, Dundalk, Co. Louth Louth 38 17532E Rural S N Druim Slaod Baile Cruaich, Cathair Na Mart, Co. Mayo 31 Mayo 17562N Rural SN Oilean Eadaigh Caislean A Bharraigh, Co. Mayo Mayo 49 13684H Rural Beannchor N S Bangor, Erris, Co. Mayo Mayo 80 16283E Rural S N Pol A Tsomais Beal An Atha, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 57 14290O Rural Scoil Naomh Brid Ballycastle, Co. Mayo Mayo 74 19451O Rural Newport Central Baile Ui Bhfiachain, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 187 15032U Rural S N Muire Gan Smal Ceathru Thaidgh, Beal Atha An Mayo 34 Fheadha, Co. Mhaigh Eo 12569C Rural S N Ros Dumhach Beal Atha An Fheadha, Co. Mhaigh Mayo 35 Eo 18594I Rural S N Achaidh An Ghlaisin Beal An Mhuirthead, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 38 14258S Rural Cill Mhor Iorrais Beal An Mhuirthead, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 66 12373I Rural S N Eachleime Beal An Atha, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 60

193 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

14866S Rural SN Beal A Bhulain Bun An Chorraigh, Cathair Na Mart, Mayo 28 Co. Mhaigh Eo 15113U Rural S N Sheamais Barnacogue, Swinford, Co. Mayo Mayo 21 13222P Rural SN Gleann A Chaisil Bun Na Habhna, Beal An Atha, Co. Mayo 56 Mhaigh Eo 13383Q Rural S N An Tsraith Bun Na Habhann, Beal An Atha, Co. Mayo 26 Mhaigh Eo 17483R Rural Carraholly N S Cathair Na Mart, Co. Mayo Mayo 87 20217N Rural Mount Palmer NS Kincon, Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 52 13225V Rural Cormaic Nfa Garranard P O, Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 45 14863M Rural Achill Sound Convent NS Achill Sound, Co. Mayo Mayo 45 14873P Rural Dookinella N.S. Keel, Achill, Co. Mayo Mayo 18 16173U Rural Kinaffe N S Swinford, Co. Mayo Mayo 24 16052I Rural S N Naomh Padraig Saile Gob A Choire, Acaill, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 33 18754E Rural SN Naomh Seosamh Bun An Chorraigh, Cathair Na Mart, Mayo 27 Co. Mhaigh Eo 17321O Rural S N An Coill Mhor Newport, Co. Mayo Mayo 28 16379R Rural Valley N S Dugort, Achill, Co. Mayo Mayo 20 14188A Rural Barnatra N S Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 21 13781F Rural Breaffy N S Castlebar, Co. Mayo Mayo 376 17176I Rural S N Realt Na Mara Mulranny, Co. Mayo Mayo 69 19776T Rural Geesala Central School Beal An Atha, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 50 15014S Rural Corclough NS Corchloch, Beal An Mhuirthid, Co. Mayo 57 Mhaigh Eo 19324H Rural S N Teaghlaigh Naofa SN Teaghlaigh Naofa, Killeen, 49 Louisburgh, Co. Mayo, Mayo 14193Q Rural S N Dubh Thuama Gaoth Saile, Beal An Atha, Co. Mayo 29 Mhaigh Eo 18082E Rural S N Dumhach Cathair Na Mart, Co. Mayo Mayo 62 18175L Rural S N Beannchair Carrowmore, Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 26 18002D Rural Drumgallagh N S Ballycroy, Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 51 13882L Rural S N Gleann Na Muaidhe Beal An Atha, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 31 16904K Rural S N Lainn Cille Cathair Na Mart, Co. Mayo Mayo 49 16618J Rural Myna N S Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 104 15866A Rural Carrakennedy N S Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 35 13667H Rural SN Muine Chonallain Beal An Atha, Co. Mayo Mayo 81 14671D Rural S N Na Craobhaighe Carrowmore-Lacken, Ballina, Co. Mayo 36 Mayo 11725I Rural Beheymore N S Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 164 14418O Rural Bofield Mixed N S Attymass, Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 31 16811D Rural Killala N S Killala, Co. Mayo Mayo 87 19488O Rural Scoil Naomh Feichin SN Ath Ti Mheasaigh, Beal Atha An Mayo 80 Fheadha, Co. Mhaigheo 18712L Rural S N Cnoc Ruscaighe Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 118 17923T Rural S N Beal An Mhuirthead Beal An Mhuirthead, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 64 17727T Rural SN Croi Muire Beal An Mhuirthid, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 107 06852L Rural Garracloon N S Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 29 05120L Rural Lehinch N S Hollymount, Co. Mayo Mayo 20 13555T Rural S N Faitche Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 95 14064F Rural S N Coill An Bhaile Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 48 13758K Rural Templemary N S Templemary NS, Killala, Co. Mayo Mayo 35 20037L Rural S N Padraig Naofa Louisburgh, Co. Mayo Mayo 137

194 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

18848N Rural S N Peadair Agus Pol Straide, Foxford, Co. Mayo Mayo 54 15539I Rural St JohNS NS Lugboy, Claremorris, Co. Mayo Mayo 52 15030Q Rural St Marys N S Aghamore, Ballyhaunis, Co. Mayo Mayo 70 16122D Rural Knock N S Claremorris, Co. Mayo Mayo 126 04796R Rural Brackloon N S Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 67 16113C Rural SN Toin Na Gaoithe Toin Na Gaoithe, Cathair Na Mart, Mayo 36 Co. Mhaigh Eo 16295L Rural SN An Chorrain Gob A Choire, Co. Mhaigh Eo Mayo 23 17129W Rural S N Naomh Padraig Rath Na Mbeach, Crossmolina, Co. Mayo 36 Mayo 16289Q Rural St Johns N S Carrowmore, Swinford, Co. Mayo Mayo 62 18429Q Rural S N Mhuire Cul Ronain, Baile Iomhair, Co. Meath Meath 34 20055N Rural Gaelscoil Eois Eanach Cille, An Chuil Darach, Co. Monaghan 27 Mhuineachain 00373P Rural Deravoy National School Deravoy, Emyvale, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 56 18234B Rural Scoil Naomh Padraig Eo-Dhruim, Castleblaney, Co. Monaghan 48 Monaghan 10429W Rural Scoil Mhuire Rockcorry, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 93 18482U Rural Mhuire Gransla Leachtgallon, Cluain Eois, Co. Monaghan 76 Muineachain 19362P Rural St Patricks N S Clara, Killybrone, Emyvale, Co. Monaghan 51 Monaghan 17069H Rural S N Muire Naofa Pollach, Rahan, Tullamore, Co. Offaly Offaly 90 05913A Rural Kilcormac Convent N S Kilcormac, Co. Offaly Offaly 68 17359Q Rural St Cormacs N S Kilcormac, Co. Offaly Offaly 33 12343W Rural Shinrone Mixed N S Shinrone, Co. Offaly Offaly 127 20068W Rural St Marys National School Cloghan, Birr, Co. Offaly Offaly 59 07455G Rural Scoil Mhuire Gan Smal Ballygar, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 86 15255R Rural Don N S Ballaghaderreen, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 43 15664L Rural Granlahan G N S Ballinlough, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 37 17748E Rural S N Padraig Naofa Dungar, Caisleain Riabhach, Co. Roscommon 81 Roscommon 15543W Rural Tibohine N S Castlerea, Roscommon Roscommon 55 19651W Rural Carracastle Central NS Carracastle, Ballaghaderreen, Co. Roscommon 81 Roscommon 18536R Rural S N Mhuire Lourdes Loch Glinne, Castlerea, Co. Roscommon 100 Roscommon 01866U Rural Ballyforan Mixed N S Ballinasloe, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 66 12767G Rural S N Ronain Naofa Cloonloo, Boyle, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 26 13047A Rural S N Lios A Cuill M Castlerea, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 78 18165I Rural Tisrara National School Tigh Srathra, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 58 17266J Rural Ballanagare N S Castlerea, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 50 02327S Rural Mantua N S Castlerea, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 7 19809I Rural Abbeycarton NS Elphin, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 161 18543O Rural S N Clochog Castlebaldwin, Boyle, Co. Roscommon Roscommon 84 15425Q Rural Fairymount N S Fairymount NS, Castlerea, Co. Roscommon 35 Roscommon 16793E Rural Mary Immaculate NS Collooney, Co. Sligo Sligo 53 17718S Rural S N Seosamh Naofa Cul Mhaoile, Sligo Sligo 53 13944H Rural S N Naomh Atrachta Kilmactigue, Aclare, Co. Sligo Sligo 13 12140I Rural Culleens N S Culleens, Co. Sligo Sligo 22 20113B Rural Scoil Croi Naofa Bunninadden, Ballymote, Co. Sligo Sligo 62 18298E Rural S N Cul Fada Cul Fada, Ballymote, Co. Sligo Sligo 91

195 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No Urban/ School Name Address County Overall Rural Enrolments September 2008

19392B Rural Scoil Naomh Aodain Scoil Aodain, Mainistir Readhain, Co. Sligo 74 Shligigh 03924S Rural Owenbeg N S Owenbeg P O, Ballina, Co. Sligo Sligo 42 19688W Rural Dromore West Central Dromore West, Sligo Sligo 99 13242V Rural Castlerock N S Aclare, Co. Sligo Sligo 48 18343G Rural S N Chaoimhghin Baile Dhaith (Littleton), Thurles, Co. Tipperary 78 Tipperary 13210I Rural St Josephs National Ballingarry, Thurles, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 61 School 17665A Rural S N Gleann Guail Thurles, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 50 19356U Rural Killenaule N S Killenaule, Thurles, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 178 15299O Rural Gaile N S Holycross, Thurles, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 15 15362S Rural S N Michil Naofa Mullinahone, Thurles, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 109 17498H Rural S N Naomh Sheosamh Toomevara, Nenagh, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 83 14791N Rural Cappawhite N S Cappawhite, Co. Tipperary Tipperary 89 18077L Rural S N Cnoc Machan Bun Machan, Co. Waterford Waterford 26 01731U Rural Ballynacargy Mixed N S Ballynacargy, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 88 17991N Rural Eoin Naofa N S Ballymore, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 100 18591C Rural Naomh Tomas N S Rathowen, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 18 17841R Rural SN Mhuire Ballyhogue, Bree, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford 66 Wexford 17769M Rural S N Mhuire Tagoat, Co. Wexford Wexford 86 17443F Rural S N Fionntain Taghmon, Co. Wexford Wexford 198 06959G Rural Clonroche N S Clonroche, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford Wexford 115 19352M Rural Sc Nais Realta Na Mara An Chill Mhor, Co. Loch Garman Wexford 400 17638U Rural S N Nmh Seosaimh Dunard, Poll Na Peiste, Cluain Na Wexford 82 Roistigh, Co. Loch Gorman, 17707N Rural S N Rath An Iubhair Rath An Iubhair, Iniscortaigh, Co. Wexford 133 Loch Gorman 17194K Rural S N Baile Ui Coileain Ballycullane, New Ross, Co. Wexford Wexford 70 14668O Rural Ballaghkeene N S Ballaghkeene, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford 95 Wexford 17734Q Rural S N Gallbhaile Ballyhogue, Gallbhaile, Inis Corthaidh, Wexford 33 Co. Loch Garman 17117P Rural S N Cul Greine Coolgreany, Gorey, Co. Wexford Wexford 88 00984V Rural Glenealy 1 N S Glenealy, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 79 18962L Rural St Ernans B N S Rathnew, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 120 16874E Rural S N Naomh Iosef G Rathnew, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 102 17669I Rural S N Treasa Naomha Cill Teagain, Co. Cille Manntain Wicklow 48

Roll No School Name Address County Overall Enrolments September 2008

70420R Carlow Vocational School Kilkenny Road, Carlow Carlow 954 70430U Vocational School Muine Beag Muine Bheag, Co. Carlow Carlow 261 70360C St Mogue’s College Bawnboy, Co. Cavan Cavan 156 70380I Breifne College Cootehill Rd, Cavan Cavan 553 70830N Ennis Community College Ennis, Co. Clare Clare 440 91448K Kilrush Community School Kilrush, Co. Clare Clare 376

196 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No School Name Address County Overall Enrolments September 2008

62530F North Monastery Secondary School Our Lady’s Mount, Cork City Cork 350 62540I Deerpark C.B.S. St Patrick’s Road, Cork City Cork 279 62621I North Presentation Farranree, Cork City Cork 308 62650P Ursuline Secondary School Blackrock, Cork City Cork 301 62730N St Patricks College Gardiner’s Hill, Cork City Cork 319 70910L St Brogan’s College Kilbrogan, Bandon, Co. Cork Cork 615 70970G Cobh Community College Carrignafoy, Cobh, Co. Cork, Cork 314 70990M Coláiste an Chraoibhin Duntaheen Road, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Cork 611 71020G Davis College Annabella, Mallow, Co. Cork, Cork 677 71030J McEgan College Macroom, Co. Cork Cork 238 71040M St Fanahan’s College Mitchelstown, Co. Cork Cork 214 71050P St Colman’s Community College Youghal Road, Midleton, Co. Cork, Cork 558 71080B Mannix College Charleville, Co. Cork Cork 135 71090E Rossa College Skibbereen, Co. Cork Cork 224 71110H Nagle Community College Mahon, Cork City Cork 222 71123Q Terence Mac Swiney Community Hollyhill, Knocknaheeny, Cork, Cork 366 College 76067L Colaiste Pobail Naomh Mhuire Cill na Mullach, Co. Cork Cork 206 91397T Bishopstown Community School Bishopstown, Cork City Cork 165 91400F Mayfield Community School Old Youghal Road, Cork City Cork 311 62770C Scoil Mhuire St Oran’s Road, Buncrana, Co. Donegal 550 Donegal, 71140Q Crana College Crana Road, Buncrana, Co. Donegal, Donegal 475 71200I Letterkenny Vocational School Windyhall, Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, Donegal 351 71220O Mulroy College Milford, Co. Donegal Donegal 340 71230R Deele College Raphoe, Co. Donegal Donegal 520 71240U Stranorlar Vocational School Main Street, Stranorlar, Co. Donegal, Donegal 261 71242B Gairm Scoil Chú Uladh Béal an Átha Móir, An Clochan, Donegal 212 Leifear, Co. DhúnnanGall 71244F Gairmscoil Mhic Diarmada An Leadhbgarbh, Arainn Mór, Co. Donegal 58 Dhún na nGall, 76084L Moville Community College Carrownaff, Moville, Co. Donegal, Donegal 478 81011L The Royal and Prior School Raphoe, Co. Donegal Donegal 492 91406R Carndonagh Community School Carndonagh, Co. Donegal Donegal 913 91407T Rosses Community School Dungloe, Co. Donegal Donegal 453 60343T St Joseph’s Secondary School Convent Lane, Rush, Co. Dublin, Dublin 475 70010V Balbriggan Community College Pine Ridge, Balbriggan, Co. Dublin, Dublin 576 70120F St Finians Community College Swords, Co. Dublin Dublin 585 91330K Holy Child Community School Pearse St, Sallynoggin, Co. Dublin, Dublin 249 60440R O’Connell School North Richmond Street, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 336 76077O Larkin Community College 1 Champions Avenue, Dublin 1 Dublin 1 405 60510M St Johns College De La Salle Le Fanu Rd, Ballyfermot, Dublin 10, Dublin 10 432 60720A Saint Dominic’s Secondary School Ballyfermot, Dublin 10 Dublin 10 410 60732H Caritas College Drumfinn Road, Ballyfermot, Dublin Dublin 10 336 10, 70240P Kylemore College Kylemore Road, Ballyfermot, Dublin Dublin 10 308 10, 60511O Beneavin De La Salle College Beneavin Road, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 456 60571J Patrician College Deanstown Ave, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 160 60581M St Kevins College Ballygall Rd East, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 334 60741I St Michaels Secondary School Wellmount Road, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 454 60852R Mater Christi Cappagh, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 210

197 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No School Name Address County Overall Enrolments September 2008

70180A Coláiste Eoin Cappagh Road, Finglas, Dublin 11, Dublin 11 221 81017A Ballymun Senior Comprehensive Ballymun, Dublin 11 Dublin 11 646 60800V Loreto College Crumlin Road, Dublin 12 Dublin 12 504 60841M Rosary College Armagh Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 255 60990G Meanscoil Chroimghlinne 314/318 Crumlin Road, Dublin 12 Dublin 12 81 60991I Our Lady Of Mercy Secondary School Mourne Road, Drimnagh, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 318 70130I Greenhills College Limekiln Avenue, Greenhills, Dublin Dublin 12 405 12, 70160R St Kevins College Clogher Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12, Dublin 12 335 70020B Grange Community College Grange Road, Dublin 13 Dublin 13 227 91318U The Donahies Community School Streamville Road, Dublin 13 Dublin 13 540 91343T St Tiernan’s Community School Parkvale, Balally, Dublin 14, Dublin 14 350 70081V Riversdale Community College Blanchardstown Rd North, Dublin 15 Dublin 15 451 91316Q Blakestown Community School Blanchardstown, Dublin 15 Dublin 15 487 91305L Ballinteer Community School Ballinteer, Dublin 16 Dublin 16 306 70330Q Coláiste Dhúlaigh Barryscourt Road, Coolock, Dublin 17, Dublin 17 445 60262T St Laurence College Loughlinstown, Dublin 18 Dublin 18 477 91310E Cabinteely Community School Cabinteely, Dublin 18 Dublin 18 544 60490J C.B.S. Westland Row Westland Row, Dublin 2 Dublin 2 133 91302F Phobailscoil Iosolde Palmerstown, Dublin 20 Dublin 20 441 70040H Deansrath Community College New Nangor Road, Clondalkin, Dublin Dublin 22 461 22, 70041J Collinstown Park Community College Neilstown Rd., Rowlagh, Clondalkin, Dublin 22 646 Dublin 22 70042L St Kevin’s Community College Fonthill Road, Clondalkin, Dublin 22, Dublin 22 339 70141N Jobstown Community College Jobstown, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 259 91335U Tallaght Community School Balrothery, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 600 91337B Killinarden Community School Killinarden, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 400 91338D St Aidan’s Community School Brookfield, Tallaght, Dublin 24, Dublin 24 443 60390F St Josephs C.B.S. Merville Ave, Fairview, Dublin 3, Dublin 3 237 70250S Marino College 14-20 Marino Mart, Fairview, Dublin Dublin 3 628 3, 60500J Marian College Ballsbridge, Dublin 4 Dublin 4 429 70200D Technical Institute Cambridge Road, Dublin 4 Dublin 4 135 60471F St David’s C.B.S. Malahide Road, Artane, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 443 60550B Chanel College Coolock, Dublin 5 Dublin 5 425 60871V Mercy College Coolock St Brendans Drive, Coolock, Dublin 5, Dublin 5 444 60430O St Pauls C.B.S. Christian Brothers, Nth Brunswick St, Dublin 7 251 Dublin 7, 60843Q St Josephs Secondary School Stanhope St, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 296 60853T Mount Carmel Secondary School Kings Inn Street, Dublin 7 Dublin 7 292 70150O Coláiste Éanna Kilkieran Road, Cabra, Dublin 7, Dublin 7 131 60410I C.B.S. James Street James’s Street, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 272 60470D Christian Brothers Synge St, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 280 60792C Presentation College Warrenmount, Dublin 8 Dublin 8 301 60872A Mercy Secondary School Goldenbridge, Inchicore, Dublin 8, Dublin 8 175 60400F St Vincents C.B.S. Glasnevin, Dublin 9 Dublin 9 299 70310K Plunkett College Swords Road, Whitehall, Dublin 9, Dublin 9 387 70321P Margaret Aylward Community College The Thatch Road, Whitehall, Dublin Dublin 9 257 9,

198 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No School Name Address County Overall Enrolments September 2008

91344V Rosmini Community School Grace Park Road, Drumcondra, Dublin Dublin 9 367 9, *63140U St Patrick’s College Dublin Road, Tuam, Co. Galway, Galway 165 62981P Coláiste Einde Threadneedle Road, Galway City Galway 609 63000E Presentation Secondary School Presentation Rd, Galway City Galway 264 63060W Scoil Áine Mainistir Na Coille Moire, Kylemore, Galway 28 Co. Galway, 71250A Colaiste Cholmcille Indreabhán, Co. na Gaillimhe Galway 206 71380N Gairmscoil na bPiarsach Ros Muc, Co. na Gaillimhe Galway 48 71390Q Tuam Vocational School Tuam, Co. Galway Galway 162 71400Q Galway Community College Wellpark, Galway City Galway 598 81012N Scoil Chuimsitheach Chiaráin An Cheathrú Rua, Co. na Gaillimhe Galway 320 91411K Scoil Phobail Mhic Dara Carna, Co. Galway Galway 154 91412M Scoil Phobail Clifden, Co. Galway Galway 423 70450D Killarney Community College New Road, Killarney, Co. Kerry, Kerry 212 70460G Community College Killorglin, Co. Kerry Kerry 146 70500P Listowel Community College Listowel, Co. Kerry Kerry 182 70540E Causeway Comprehensive School Causeway, Co. Kerry Kerry 525 70550H Tralee Community College Clash, Tralee, Co. Kerry Kerry 512 61700W St Joseph’s Acadamy Kildare Town Kildare 191 61702D St Pauls Secondary School Monasterevin, Co. Kildare Kildare 262 70650L Athy Community College Athy, Co. Kildare Kildare 251 70660O Curragh Post-Primary School McSwiney Road, Curragh, Co. Kildare 134 Kildare, 70680U St Conleth’s Vocational School Station Road, Newbridge, Co. Kildare, Kildare 323 70690A Vocational School Kildare College of Further Studies, Kildare 54 Kildare Town 70710D Pipers Hill College Killashee, Naas, Co. Kildare Kildare 506 70720G St Farnan’s Post Primary School Prosperous, Co. Kildare Kildare 328 70730J Ardscoil Rath Iomgháin Rathangan, Co. Kildare Kildare 601 70590T Duiske College Graignamanagh, Co. Kilkenny Kilkenny 139 70600T Coláiste Mhuire Johnstown, Co. Kilkenny Kilkenny 422 70610W City Vocational School New Street, Kilkenny Kilkenny 284 70620C Coláiste Cois Siúire Mooncoin, Co. Kilkenny Kilkenny 159 70640I Grennan College Ladywell St, Thomastown, Co. Kilkenny 361 Kilkenny, †71490U St Aengus Post-Primary Limerick Road, Mountrath, Co. Laois, Laois 86 71510A Portlaoise Vocational School Railway Street, Portlaoise, Co. Laois, Laois 586 64200R Colaiste Mhichil Sexton Street, Limerick City Limerick 511 64250J Presentation Secondary School Sexton Street, Limerick City Limerick 557 64280S Salesian Secondary School Fernbank, Limerick City Limerick 317 64290V Ardscoil Mhuire Corbally, Limerick City Limerick 252 71790J Desmond College Gortboy, Newcastlewest, Co. Limerick, Limerick 426 71810M Coláiste Pobail Mhichíl Cappamore, Co. Limerick Limerick 96 71840V Colaiste Chiarain Croom, Co. Limerick Limerick 824 71870H Abbeyfeale Vocational School Abbeyfeale, Co. Limerick Limerick 195 71920T St Nessan’s Community College Moylish Park, Limerick City Limerick 314 76070A Coláiste Ióasef Kilmallock, Co. Limerick Limerick 206 91446G St Endas Community School Kilmallock Rd, Limerick City Limerick 121 71690F Ballymahon Vocational School Ballymahon, Co. Longford Longford 228 71710I Ardscoil Phadraig Granard, Co. Longford Longford 144

199 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

Roll No School Name Address County Overall Enrolments September 2008

71720L Lanesboro Community College Lanesboro, Co. Longford Longford 209 71730O Templemichael College Templemichael, Longford Longford 305 71750U Bush Post Primary School Riverstown, Dundalk, Co. Louth Louth 442 71761C St Oliver’s Community College Rathmullen, Drogheda, Co. Louth, Louth 748 71770D Ó Fiaich College Dublin Road, Dundalk, Co. Louth, Louth 814 71780G Scoil Ui Mhuiri Barn Road, Dunleer, Co. Louth, Louth 411 91441T Ardee Community School Ardee, Co. Louth Louth 606 64690O Scoil Muire Agus Padraig Swinford, Co. Mayo Mayo 461 72020L Moyne College Ballina, Co. Mayo Mayo 234 72050U St Brendan’s College Belmullet, Co. Mayo Mayo 432 72070D McHale College Achill, Co. Mayo Mayo 167 72100J St Tiernan’s College Crossmolina, Co. Mayo Mayo 247 72140V Colaiste Chomain Rossport, Co. Mayo Mayo 56 72160E Vocational School Westport, Co. Mayo Mayo 100 76060U Davitt College Springfield, Castlebar, Co. Mayo, Mayo 662 71970L St Fintinas Post Primary School Longwood, Co. Meath Meath 150 71980O O’Carolan College Nobber, Co. Meath Meath 414 72010I Beaufort College Trim Rd, Navan, Co. Meath, Meath 446 91508C Boyne Community School Trim, Co. Meath Meath 595 72171J Largy College Clones, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 481 72180K Inver College Carrickmacross, Co. Monaghan Monaghan 505 72190N Castleblayney College Dublin Road, Castleblayney, Co. Monaghan 312 Monaghan 72210Q Beech Hill College Monaghan Monaghan 662 72530L Ard Scoil Chiarain Naofa Frederick St., Clara, Co. Offaly Offaly 222 72540O Oaklands Community College Sr. Senan Avenue, Edenderry, Co. Offaly 295 Offaly, 72560U Tullamore College Riverside, Tullamore, Co. Offaly, Offaly 463 72290R Roscommon Vocational School Lisnamult, Roscommon Roscommon 140 72300R Corran College Ballymote, Co. Sligo Sligo 140 72320A Coláiste Iascaigh Easkey, Co. Sligo Sligo 110 72360M Ballinode College Ballinode, Sligo Sligo 597 65350S Patrician Presentation Rocklow Rd., Tipperary S.R. Tipperary 146 72400V Vocational School Carrick-On-Suir, Tipperary S.R. Tipperary 328 72420E Vocational School Clonmel, Tipperary S.R. Tipperary 437 72430H Scoil Ruain Killenaule, Tipperary S.R. Tipperary 362 72450N St Joseph’s College Newport, Tipperary N.R. Tipperary 157 72480W St Alibe’s School Rosanna Road, Tipperary S.R. Tipperary 269 72490C Vocational School Castlemeadows, Tipperary N.R. Tipperary 337 64930I C.B.S. Mount Sion Barrack Street, Waterford Waterford 192 64970U Presentation Secondary School Waterford Waterford 398 72220T Coláiste Chathail Naofa Youghal Rd, Dungarvan, Co. Waterford 394 Waterford 72241E St Paul’s Community College Browne’s Road, Waterford Waterford 503 76066J Meánscoil San Nioclás Rinn O gCuanach, Co. Phort Lairge Waterford 128 63191O St Aloysius College The Park, Athlone, Co. Westmeath, Westmeath 340 71420W Castlepollard Community College Castlepollard, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 151 71430C Columba College Killucan, Co. Westmeath Westmeath 137 71450I Mullingar Community College Millmount Road, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath 462 Westmeath,

200 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Roll No School Name Address County Overall Enrolments September 2008

71600B Coláiste Abbain Adamstown, Co. Wexford Wexford 181 71610E Bridgetown Vocational College Bridgetown, Co. Wexford Wexford 586 71620H Vocational College Bunclody Bunclody, Co. Wexford Wexford 285 71630K Vocational School Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford Wexford 776 71650Q Kilmuckridge Vocational College Kilmuckridge, Co. Wexford Wexford 205 71660T New Ross Vocational College New Ross, Co. Wexford Wexford 263 71680C Wexford Vocational College Westgate, Wexford Wexford 462 91431Q Ramsgrange Community School Ramsgrange, Co. Wexford Wexford 378 70740M Arklow Community College Coolgreaney Rd, Arklow, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 447 70770V St Thomas’ Community College Novara Avenue, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Wicklow 1135 70800E St Kevin’s Community College Dunlavin, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 372 70810H Avondale Community College Rathdrum, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 429 70820K Abbey Community College Wicklow Wicklow 314 91376L St Killian’s Community School Ballywaltrim, Co. Wicklow Wicklow 522

*This school continues to receive DEIS supports as part of the newly amalgamated St Jarlath’s College, Tuam — 68074M. †This school continues to receive DEIS supports as part of the newly amalgamated Mountrath Community School — 91550B.

Grant Payments.

291. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the details of all grants payable on an annual basis to primary schools by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7495/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The information requested by the Deputy is outlined in the attached table. The Deputy will be aware that, as agreed in the Renewed Programme for Government, Budget 2010 has provided additional support to allow schools to provide grant assistance for books. My officials will be consulting with the management bodies to consider the details of how these funds will be channelled to schools having regard to the desirability of streamlining grant payments. Schools will be advised of the arrangements following this process.

Month Date Grant

September 18 Early Start (Preschool) Full Unit Grant 18 Early Start (Preschool) Half Unit Grant 18 Support Teacher Grant

October 23 School Support Project Unclusterable Grant 23 Teaching Aid Grant 23 HSCL Part-Time Hours Grant

November 20 DEIS School Support Project Grant 20 Early Start (Preschool) Capitation Grant

December 11 PBU Minor Works Grant 11 PBU Minor Works Grant (Enrol)

December 18 Supervision Grant (balance of hours due to schools) 18 Standardised Testing Grant

January 29 Capitation Grant (1St moiety)

201 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] Month Date Grant

February

March 26 Ancillary Services Grant (C49) 26 Ancillary Services Grant (C50)

April 16 Supervision Grant (schools with 1, 2 or 3 teachers only)

May

June 25 Capitation Grant (2nd moiety)

July

292. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the details of all grants payable on an annual basis to post-primary schools by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7496/10]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The information requested by the Deputy is outlined in the attached table. The funding arrangements at post-primary level reflect the sectoral division of our second-level system. At the core of all arrangements is reliance upon capitation as the principal determinant of funding. My Department provides funding to secondary schools by way of per capita grants, which affords schools considerable flexibility in the use of these resources to cater for the needs of their pupils. Budget allocations for schools in the Community and Comprehensive school sector, along with those in the VEC sector, are increased on a pro rata basis in line with increases in the per capita grant paid to voluntary secondary schools. All post primary schools are eligible for recurrent per capita grants towards special classes and curricular support grants. The Deputy will be aware that, as agreed in the Renewed Prog- ramme for Government, budget 2010 has provided additional support to allow schools to provide grant assistance for books and the funding of certain school programmes. My officials will be consulting with the management bodies to consider the details of how these funds will be channelled to schools having regard to the desirability of streamlining grant payments. Schools will be advised of the arrangements following this process.

202 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers 1St Inst. 2nd Inst. 3rd Inst. s Number of Date of Payment ’ Sector Comprehensive Instalments Schedule of Per Capita Grants Payable to schools 2009/10 school year. Grant Type Voluntary Community & VEC Standard Per CapitaCaretaker / School Support ServicesSecretary Grant / School Support ServicesSchool Grant Services Support Fund(School Support Services Grant) C&CRemote Schools Area GrantSpecial Class Grant YesSpecial Subjects YesBi-Lingual GrantDEIS Funding / Disadvantaged Capitation NoSupervision/Substitution GrantHSCL No unclusterable Yes grant Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes 3 Yes Yes Yes No 3 Yes No Yes Yes n/a Yes Yes Yes Sept. 3 No Sept. 3 No No n/a Yes Jan 1 No Oct Jan Sept. Yes No 3 Sept. 1 n/a April 2 Dec March Jan April 1 Jan 1 Nov 1 May/June Dec. Dec April April April Feb May N/A Oct Aug N/A April N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

203 Questions— 11 February 2010. Written Answers

Third Level Fees.

293. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Education and Science if a person (details supplied) in County Kildare qualifies for a third level back to education course; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7542/10] Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I understand from the Deputy that in this case the student wishes to determine her eligibility for free tuition fees at third level. Under the terms of my Department’s Free Fee Initiative the Exchequer meets the cost of tuition fees in respect of eligible students who are pursuing full-time undergraduate courses of study. The main conditions are that students must: a) Be first-time undergraduates; and b) Hold E.U. nationality; and c) Have been ordinarily resident in an E.U. Member State for at least three of the five years preceding their entry to an approved third level course. The Free Fees Initiative also extends to persons with official refugee status in the State, and their family members, and to certain non EU family members of EU nationals who have permission to reside in the State from the Department of Justice. In any case where the Free Fees Initiative does not apply, the rate of tuition fee to be charged is a matter for the individual third level institutions. In that regard, Section 473A, of the Taxes Consolidation Act, 1997, provides tax relief, at the standard rate of tax, for tuition fees paid in respect of approved courses at approved colleges of higher education including certain approved undergraduate and postgraduate courses in E.U. Member States and in non EU countries.

Question No. 294 answered with Question No. 231.

204