Vol. 198 Thursday, No. 8 26 November 2009

DI´OSPO´ IREACHTAI´ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SEANAD E´ IREANN

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

Thursday, 26 November 2009.

Business of Seanad ………………………………671 Order of Business …………………………………672 European Council Decisions: Motions …………………………688 Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009 [Seanad Bill amended by the Da´il]: Report and Final Stages … … 690 Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009: Motion for Earlier Signature ………………694 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Committee Stage ………………694 EU Council Decision: Motion ……………………………702 Adjournment Matters: Guardianship Payments ……………………………711 County Galway School Closure …………………………713 Schools Building Projects ……………………………714 SEANAD ÉIREANN

————

Déardaoin, 26 Samhain 2009. Thursday, 26 November 2009.

————

Chuaigh an i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m.

————

Paidir. Prayer.

————

Business of Seanad. An Cathaoirleach: I have received notice from Senator Ciaran Cannon that, on the motion for the Adjournment of the House today, he proposes to raise the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Education and Science to provide an update on the planned provision of second level education at Seamount College, Kinvara, County Galway.

I have also received notice from Senator Frances Fitzgerald of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Social and Family Affairs to outline the current criteria for the guardianship payment in the light of the fact that the current criteria exclude some legal guardians from availing of the payment.

I have also received notice from Senator of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Education and Science to make a statement on the status of the upgrade and extension of Rochestown College, County .

I have also received notice from Senator of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism to make a statement on any planned consolidation of national art galleries and the implications of such plans for the individual galleries.

I have also received notice from Senator Rónán Mullen of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Education and Science to urgently outline when payment of third level grants will be made as there are still large numbers of students waiting to hear if they have been successful in receiving a grant, the student assistance fund in UCD is exhaus- ted and the students are being evicted from their accommodation.

I have also received notice from Senator of the following matter:

The need for the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to clarify if an investigation by the Health and Safety Authority will be carried out as a matter of urgency after the roof on an apartment block in Carrickmines, south Dublin, was blown off in the recent storm and if, following this incident, immediate spot checks will be undertaken by the HSA in other apartment buildings and recommendations made. 671 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

[An Cathaoirleach.]

I regard the matters raised by Senators Cannon, Fitzgerald, Buttimer, Donohoe and Mullen as suitable for discussion on the Adjournment. I have selected the matters raised by Senators Cannon, Fitzgerald and Buttimer and they will be taken at the conclusion of business. I regret I have had to rule out of order the matter raised by Senator Corrigan, as the Minister has no official responsibility in the matter. The other Senators may give notice on another day of the matters they wish to raise.

Order of Business. Senator Dan Boyle: The Order of Business is No. 1, motion re agreement between the European Union and Japan on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters; No. 2, motion re agreement between the European Union and the USA on the processing and transfer of finan- cial messaging data; No. 3, motion re forensic service providers carrying out laboratory activi- ties; No. 4, motion re preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting victims, all to be taken without debate at the conclusion of the Order of Business; No. 5, Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009 [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil], to be taken at the conclusion of Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive; No. 6, earlier signature motion, to be taken at the conclusion of No. 5; No. 7, Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009 — Committee and Remaining Stages, to be taken at the conclusion of No. 6; and No. 8, motion re Council decision on the use of information technology for customs purposes, to be taken at the conclusion of No. 7 and to conclude within 45 minutes, on which spokespersons and other Senators may speak for five minutes and on which Senators may share time, with the agreement of the House.

Senator : I support those Senators who spoke last night on the recent flooding and believe we should deal with the issue as if it was a full national emergency. Flood waters are at record levels across the Shannon basin and it is only right the Government should declare a national emergency, put a Minister in charge to deal with the issue properly for people in the west and midlands who have been flooded. If the weather turns nasty again in the next few days, they will have a complete catastrophe on their hands. I, therefore, ask the Deputy Leader to call on the Taoiseach to declare this a national emergency and have a dedicated Minister responsible for dealing with the issue. Another report from the Department of Health and Children shows that home care packages from the HSE are poor value for money. There is unbelievable inconsistency as regards home care packages for patients. One is six times more likely to be offered such a package in County Meath than in County Wicklow. This clearly indicates inconsistency within the HSE which was established to ensure there would not be such inequality in the delivery of health care services across the country. The fact that it is delivering poor value for money is not surprising, but it is unfortunate in the times in which we live. Perhaps the Deputy Leader might arrange for an early debate on crime. It might not be possible do this before Christmas, but certainly such a debate should take place as soon as possible afterwards. There is far too much violent crime. Last night a shopkeeper in County Wicklow was murdered while defending his business. In my constituency, County Wexford, there have been two murders in the last two months which were totally unnecessary. There is a sense that crime is out of control. I am not asking the Minister to come to the Seanad, but we could have a debate among ourselves to determine whether crime is really out of control and how bad things are getting. There is certainly enormous fear among the general public that crime is out of control and that the Government has lost control in this regard. I do not intend to refer to the economy, as I am sure we shall be debating the issue from next week onwards. 672 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

However, if Ministers are conducting a debate on the economy, they should provide Members with up to date information as to what the Government plans to do with the economy, rather than consistently asking the Opposition for its views to help out the Government. Per- haps Ministers should give their views on what they wish to achieve over the coming years.

Senator Joe O’Toole: Since the foundation of the State, the issue of Shannon flooding has been the plaything of different political parties. I recall that Éamon de Valera promised to drain the Shannon 70 or 80 years ago. I introduced a Bill in this House in 1998 with the support of Senators Madeleine Taylor-Quinn and Kathleen O’Meara that was rejected by the Fianna Fáil-led Government. It dealt with the entire issue of water management etc. In the previous year, the Bill had been introduced to the House and the -led Government had refused it. I nearly fell off my seat yesterday when I heard the Leader of the House mention the Doherty report. I have to hand the Doherty report and demand that Members discuss it next year. I thought that of all things, the Leader would not wish to have it discussed. This report deals with territory the Cathaoirleach and I know well, right up to the doorstep of the Cathaoir- leach’s own house. This report was published in 2000 by a sub-committee of the joint committee on enterprise and included proposals such as raising the storage level of Lough Ree and Lough Allen and to increase the channel capacity at Banagher to 255 cu. m per second. Had this been implemented, the Cathaoirleach might not have had the water on his doorstep this week. Other proposals included the removal of the Meelick weir, the diversion of the Suck, the raising of the sluice gates at Athlone and the road levels in Athlone, Clare and Galway, as well as to reduce river levels in October. I could go on and on. This report dealt with all those issues. The Deputy Leader’s then party leader, Deputy Sargent, also was on the sub-committee. I have tried to get the report discussed in this House and have raised it repeatedly. While I am partial to the River Shannon for reasons that will remain unstated, the solution exists. This is a national emergency but it has been so for many years. I refer to the floods of 1914, 1954, which damaged the Cathaoirleach’s home town, and 1999. It is all there, including a proposal to the ESB that the water levels be reduced in Ardnac- rusha and all those areas in mid-October every year prior to the floods. This report contains all this information, including accurate costs. I seek a debate on this issue because it is abso- lutely appalling and embarrassing for everyone. Tá tuarascáil le bheith foilsithe inniu mar gheall ar an Ghaeltacht agus rudaí mar sin agus de réir dealramh tá sé mar moladh sa tuarascáil sin go dtógfar óÚdarás na Gaeltachta an cúram agus an fhreagracht do fostaíocht i nGaeltachtaí na tíre. Chomh maith le sin, tá moladh ann go n-aistreofar cúram cúrsaí teanga ón Aire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta go dtíÚdarás na Gaeltachta. This proposal is as daft as I have ever heard. It is to take away from Údarás na Gaeltachta its main role, which is to create jobs and develop industry in the Gael- tacht areas. This will be transferred from the Údarás to the IDA or some national group. At the same time, believe it or not, it is proposed to take from Aire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta the entire responsibility for the development and protection of the language, which will be moved to Údarás na Gaeltachta. I cannot imagine anything more daft then those two proposals. Tá sé thar am go mbeadh díospóireacht anseo sa Teach ar an ábhar seo. Tá seo thar a bheith tábhachtach agus caithfimid tuiscint a bheith againn ar an scéal. Ba chóir don Aire teacht isteach chugainn agus an scéalamhíniú dúinn.

Senator : When Members ask themselves what service they can give to the people in the context of the flooding crisis, it pertains to what should be done in the future. In part, Members can give voice and have a role in giving voice to people who are faced with this situation on a daily basis. I refer to those whose homes and lives have been destroyed or almost destroyed in many cases. While this is important, others such as the media can do it as well 673 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

[Senator Alex White.] and people can do it themselves. One can see and hear the frustration of people on radio and television. However, politicians operate in a completely different context. Most importantly, their role pertains to deciding what to do to ensure such things do not happen again.

Senator : Hear, hear.

Senator Alex White: Otherwise, they have no real role. Members have been debating the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill in this House in the past week or two. I consider it to be good legislation in the main and my party has made this clear in the course of the debate. If memory serves, it includes a reference in the context of development plans to the risk associated with flooding. I ask the Deputy Leader to ask the Minister to re-examine this legislation in the context of returning to this House on Report Stage and subsequently to the Dáil, to ascertain whether it can be strengthened further. I wager that in practically every case in which houses and developments have been built on flood plains over the past ten to 15 years, some lone voice who stood up to argue against it was told he or she was anti-investment, anti-building, anti-progress or anti-something and was shot down over it. From my personal experience of being on a local authority in an urban area, I know this is what happens to people who raise genuine issues, including people in the Deputy Leader’s party and my party——

Senator David Norris: And in this House.

Senator Alex White: ——and in this House in respect of improper, ill-advised and inap- propriate development and planning carried out in an improper and unsustainable way. This is the difficulty we face. It is not simply about the weather. Some people across this debate like to suggest this is about the weather and that the Government has no control over it and so they throw their heads back. However, John Gibbons published a good piece in today’s The Irish Times, reminding his readers that this crisis does not follow from a particularly serious period of storms. It has to do with our woeful lack of preparedness in many parts of the country. The kind of debate Members must have as politicians is to ascertain what service they will provide to the people through the planning system and otherwise to ensure there is no rep- etition of what has happened in recent days, rather than simply giving voice to the genuine hurt that exists.

Senator : I note the Taoiseach is on tour today in counties Westmeath and Offaly and has been on tour in the other affected parts as well. I commend him on his immedi- ate action to go on the ground and to see for himself exactly what is the position.

Senator : It is hardly immediate.

Senator Terry Leyden: Members share their concerns with the people of Athlone at present. Ballinasloe also has suffered, as have south Galway, County Roscommon and everywhere else. It is clear that \10 million constitutes an initial amount for assistance. Again, while a \2 million fodder scheme will not be adequate, I presume the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Smith, will top that up because quite a number of farmers have lost their fodder. I saw pictures on television last night of fodder that was floating. Unquestionably, this is a national emergency and serious hardship cases have arisen. I again commend all involved and in particular I note we owe the Army a great debt of gratitude because its personnel are unselfish in their work. Instead of seeing the creation of regional or area funds, I recommend that the Irish Red Cross should open a national fund for those who have suffered hardship and that it should be matched euro for euro by the Government. This appeal should commence immediately this weekend and everyone should support it. A sum 674 Order of 26 November 2009. Business of \20 per person would yield a fund of \80 million, which multiplied by two would give \160 million. I refer to the reality of life for small businesses and people who are really dejected. Even though some may have been covered by insurance, it will not cover the loss of jobs in the small industries that are affected. As there has been an enormous amount of television coverage by TV3 and RTE, the footage exists and consequently it will be easy to know exactly who has been affected. Most people or areas affected have been filmed.

Senator John Paul Phelan: No, they have not.

Senator Terry Leyden: There also are aerial photographs and much material has been cap- tured. My most extraordinary experience was when I visited Padraig Lyons’s house in Milltown, Castleplunkett last Monday, which was on a dry location on his family farm. Moreover, as his grandparents had this farm, they were familiar with the location on which the house was built and there was no evidence of any possibility of flooding. Nevertheless, through a swallow hole of some sort, the house was flooded above its window level. Another extraordinary develop- ment was that the Office of Public works has agreed to the building of a decentralisation office in Roscommon town. Although it has expertise in this regard, the office was built on a flood plain. Moreover, by building there, it created further floods in the area. This matter can be solved. A fund is required for those in need.

Senator John Paul Phelan: I also wish to raise the issue of flooding. While I agree with much of what Senator Leyden said, I raise, in particular, the plight of farmers, many of whom have lost their winter fodder. Will it be possible to discuss agriculture next week and the impact of the flooding on that sector? Recent media reports suggest farm incomes will be 20% lower this year than last year. Many in our society have experienced dramatic decreases in their incomes but agriculture has taken the biggest hit of any sector. The Government has inflicted much of this by suspending the REPS and other schemes. I urge the Deputy Leader to arrange that discussion in the run-up to the budget in order that the Minister for Finance will look more favourably on the agriculture sector than he has in the past two budgets. There is no reason not to have it next Tuesday or Thursday afternoon.

Senator : I agree with all of the points raised about the flood catastrophe. We must now consider how we can prepare to ensure this never happens again. All county man- agers should be called in because they know the areas affected. They and the county engineers know what is possible. What are the plans for these areas? We need to keep this discussion on the agenda, receive updates on progress made and hear what decisions will be made in the next couple of months to prevent anything like this happening again. The last report on the future skill needs of the food and beverages sector was issued in 2003. It would be useful to have a debate on this area and examine the education and training provided today for those employed in the industry. The food industry will be a key growth area. There may not be an opportunity to debate the matter before Christmas because there is so much on the agenda, but I would like to see it on it in the new year.

Senator : I was very interested in the statements made last night on the flood- ing and also in what Senator Alex White said today when he almost repeated the words of the Deputy Leader last night that we brought this flooding on ourselves. We cannot blame nature. We have done things in the past few years that make us responsible. It reminds me of the position of the economy. When somebody asks us later what we did that brought the economy to its knees, we will say we stopped working for a day and threatened to stop again next week and that we crossed the Border to purchase goods because we had made ourselves uncompeti- 675 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

[Senator Feargal Quinn.] tive. I came into the House in 1993 following a meeting with some Canadians when their Prime Minister was here. They said that in 1922, when we formed the State, the economies, popu- lations and natural resources of Canada and Argentina were equal. Seventy years later Argentina was bankrupt and Canada was a G7 member. Nobody but the citizens of Argentina was to blame for the running of its economy in those years.

Senator David Norris: There was a military dictatorship in Argentina.

Senator Feargal Quinn: They allowed a military dictatorship to happen. They elected Pero` n. They might have done other things also. Those of us fortunate to have responsibility in these Houses do not understand we have made ourselves so uncompetitive. I went to Dundalk a few months ago when a store was closing down and asked the people whether they would have to go to Newry to find work and they said no, because they would earn only one third of what they would earn in Dundalk. I was asked on Radio Ulster last night whether it was true that pay in the South was a multiple of that in the North. It is our responsibility to solve the problems in this economy. Let us not act like Nero who fiddled while Rome burned.

Senator : Will the Deputy Leader write to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to ask that we join Cumbria in requesting funds from the European Social Fund, under the Lisbon treaty, to deal with a national disaster? My county colleague, Senator Prendergast, spoke well last night during the statements on the flooding. She had obviously been out in the flood waters and made the valid point that when matters go off the television screens or radio, they are forgotten. I cannot think of many things that would reward us better for early investment than dealing with floodwater.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: Hear, hear.

Senator John Hanafin: We all have a responsibility to recognise that we need aerial photo- graphs and ensure no planning permission is given where there is a new flood plain. We must ask the insurance companies to pay out early and put together a national plan to spend money to ensure people have flood barriers in their homes and that there are flood barriers in towns and cities to prevent a recurrence. We must take community steps that will make all the difference.

Senator : Last week we discussed the Defence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and paid tribute to the work of the Defence Forces on peacekeeping missions abroad. In the past week we have seen the Trojan efforts of the Army to help the victims of the flooding. The numbers in the Defence Forces are below 10,000, the lowest in over four 11 o’clock decades. Will the Deputy Leader invite the Minister for Defence to come into the House to explain whether he intends to increase numbers in the Defence Forces? Has he sought funding from the Minister for Finance for recruitment to the Defence Forces? This week he announced 50 long overdue promotions, but it is necessary to increase numbers in the Defence Forces. In recent weeks we have asked for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to come into the House to discuss not only murders and attacks on elderly people and the over- crowding in our prisons, but we have not seen him. Will the Deputy Leader arrange for him to come here to account for the deplorable efforts of his Department because the Government seems to be soft on crime and law and order?

Senator David Norris: At the beginning of this difficult economic period over a year ago I sounded a warning about the Government’s sinister manoeuvrings in seeking to dismantle 676 Order of 26 November 2009. Business every single State agency, including the Combat Poverty Agency, the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission, which protected the vulnerable. It was done with little protest. Despite the fact that the issue was raised repeatedly in the House, there was no appetite to cover these issues in the media. A group called Equal Rights Alliance was established to fight for the retention of some support for the vulnerable. It recently held a conference and invited a distinguished legal person, Mr. Colm Ó Cinneide, a member of the European Commit- tee of Social Rights, to address it. In his lecture he indicated there was a perception that Ireland which had been seen as a leading country when it came to social rights had fallen from grace. It is now being used as an example by countries such as Pakistan which recently cited our blasphemy law. I want to give a specific local instance of what is happening without much being said in public about it, that is, the takeover by the Government of community development projects. This is nothing other than a smash and grab raid. So much for the Government’s commitment to promote active citizenship, participatory democracy and local consultation. There have been no examinations, reviews or evaluations of these projects, some of which have been dismissed as non-viable. Those which are viable are told to dissolve and surrender their assets. In Bal- lybeg, County Waterford, the parish centre is legally an asset of the community’s development project. It was given to the project by the Dominicans and later funds were raised by local people, with up to 20 women walking to Dublin, among other projects, to raise money to furnish and equip the centre and add an extension. The project has recently been told to surrender the centre to the Government. This is a smash and grab raid. These matters must be consistently and continually raised in the House because the Govern- ment has disabled every voice for the people concerned. It is disgraceful in this circumstance that this is the way the Government is behaving.

Senator : I also want to raise the matter of farm incomes, as referred to by Senator John Paul Phelan. The Irish Farmers Association estimates farm incomes in 2009 will show a drop of 28% on top of a 13% drop in the previous year. Farmers particularly have been affected by the recent flooding, on top of such a devastating fall in income. There are also villages and towns which are badly affected. It is surprising, therefore, that the Government has not made an application to the European Commission for aid in this respect. The Lisbon treaty and previous treaties provide for solidarity among member states when there are natural disasters. I know the Taoiseach’s response was, “We have been in touch with Brussels”. However, we should go a little further and get the pencil out to make a formal application. The European Union has assisted us in a similar situation before. With NAMA, we will also be looking to the European Union to come to our aid. We have evidence from the banks at yesterday’s meeting of the Joint Committee on Finance and Public Service that the NAMA bonds will not lead to an overall improvement in credit lending. The bonds which will be given to the banks in lieu of loans will assist them in restoring their balance sheets. Bank leaders say they would be in terrible trouble if they did not have NAMA but the bonds will not necessarily lead to the availability of greater credit in the economy. That was, however, the very purpose of the exercise. That is what is provided in the EU guidelines. There should be a quid pro quo and it should be monitored. We have one statement from the banks that NAMA will not lead to the availability of greater credit, but when justifying NAMA, the Minister for Finance says it will happen. Again, we will be relying on the European Union to ensure NAMA is reshaped and fit for purpose when it is formally notified by the Government. Will the House be kept informed of the notification of NAMA to the European Commission and what the Government puts into it? 677 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

Senator Lisa McDonald: Will the Deputy Leader arrange a debate on the upcoming carbon tax and how it will affect those towns not on the natural gas grid? Industry in such towns will be put at a disadvantage if such a tax is introduced. There are pros and cons to the proposal, but it highlights the lack of joined-up thinking between Departments. I note my colleagues raised the issue of domestic violence yesterday when I was, unfortu- nately, at a constituency meeting. A commitment was made to have a debate on the issue and I hope it can be held in the next 14 days, as it would tie in with the campaign of Women’s Aid to have 16 days of action opposing violence against women. I have requested a debate, as has Senator Bacik, on the participation of women in politics and the recent Oireachtas report on the topic. As of yet I have not heard when this debate will be scheduled.

Senator : I support the call from my colleagues for an urgent debate on the current crisis facing the agricultural community. As Senators John Paul Phelan and Regan stated, the income drop suffered by the farming sector in the past 12 months has been serious. When one adds the current flooding and fodder crisis to the equation, there is a bleak winter ahead for the farming community. Will the Deputy Leader arrange a debate next week on this matter to allow us to go through the various issues of concern, highlight the problems that need attention from the Government and, I hope, seek some degree of relief? I agree with Senator Twomey on his concerns about the Health Service Executive’s home care package. In that sense, I am revisiting what I have raised in the House on a significant number of occasions, namely, our policy on the care of the elderly. There was a substantial debate on the new nursing homes scheme. Sometimes it is presented by the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, and her Department as a panacea and a one-size-fits-all solution. However, it is not. There is a great need and scope for an expansion of the home care package. That it works differently across the various Health Service Executive regions shows the lack of leadership and consistency in the executive’s and the Department’s policy. Good value for money can be obtained from home care packages where they are working. The Minister expects up to 10,000 persons to qualify for the package, which would allow many people to remain in their homes and communities with their families rather than being institutionalised in nursing homes. It is a philosophy we should support, not just in words but financial deeds. There should be a standard scheme and delivery across the country. Will the Deputy Leader bring some sense to the scheme which is working with varying levels of success? We need to have this matter on the agenda and ensure the scheme remains in place.

Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú: I support Senator Quinn’s comments on finding a solution to the current economic crisis. He basically said we must come off the fence and stop the blame game. Instead, we must look to ourselves and see what we can do as people with experience. For some months the debate has not been helpful; it has been more like talk outside a public house. It is public sector versus private sector, unions versus employers, employees versus employers. It is going around in circles and achieving nothing. Senator Joe O’Reilly made a similar comment a few weeks ago in that regard, which I supported. I genuinely believe that even if the views put forward this morning by Senator Quinn are not currently common cur- rency, as sure as night follows day they will be centre stage to any progress we will make in the future. This House should be providing leadership in this regard. If we were to hold a full debate on the issue, leaving aside all blame and setting out our personal experiences in terms of what we are hearing on the ground and what we have observed from positive forward- thinking people, I have no doubt we would begin to put together elements of a recovery package. I do not believe any one grand plan will solve the current economic crisis. It will take a number of small plans to do so. 678 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

The Celtic tiger evolution was not to all intents and purposes one single plan but many people bringing their talents, resources and vision to bear on the potential of the Irish people at the time. We will need more of this in the future if we are to recover. I agree with Senator Quinn that when we look back in years to come many of the answers now given by many of us will not be to our credit. Let us not waste this opportunity. I call on the Deputy Leader to arrange for a focused, responsive debate — I am not speaking in this regard of the pre-budget debate — based on our experiences, leaving aside the blame game while doing so.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: Sadly, it never rains but it pours. We are hearing that the worst is yet to come in terms of flooding in the west. As a result of rising waters in the Shannon 50 more homes in Galway are this morning submerged in water. The council is unable to assist one woman who has been housebound for five days. I agree with much of what Senator Twomey said. It is time the Taoiseach declared this flooding a national emergency and fully mobilised the Army. The Army should be utilised to assist people. There can be no shortcuts in dealing with this crisis. It is disgraceful that the Taoiseach has only at this stage committed \10 million to the clean-up.

A Senator: Hear, hear.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: Although we did not wish public sector employees to strike approximately \50 million has been saved as a result, the least amount that should be commit- ted to the clean-up operation. We must be in the long term, as has been said by many Senators, prepared for future flooding. There is no doubt that poor planning decisions have been made, in particular in flood plains. As I discovered a year and a half ago following flooding in Oran- more, the clean up of drains and waterways requires the engagement of the council, the OPW and the National Parks and Wildlife Service. We must ensure easier co-ordination if we are to get the job done. Senator Ó Murchú spoke of the need for a national recovery plan. Education is part of that recovery plan. The Union of Students in Ireland, USI, has put forward the well proven case that only one third of the student registration fee of \1,500 per annum is invested in student services while two thirds of it is used to subsidise their fees.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator can raise that issue another day.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: I now hear that the Higher Education Authority, HEA, has arranged an emergency meeting with the students union for next Monday.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator’s time has expired.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: My question to the Deputy Leader——

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator’s time has expired.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: I will finish on this point. My question to the Deputy Leader is——

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator was allocated two minutes and her time has expired. The Senator can ask her question another day.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: I appreciate that. May I ask the——

An Cathaoirleach: No. I am calling Senator Glynn. 679 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: ——Deputy Leader to ask the Minister to confirm——

An Cathaoirleach: No. Members are running over time and this cannot continue.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: ——that there will be no increase in the student registration fee in the next budget?

An Cathaoirleach: Senator Healy Eames must resume her seat or leave the House.

Senator Terry Leyden: Not again.

Senator Camillus Glynn: I agree with all Members’ comments in regard to the adverse weather conditions being experienced and how this is impacting in an adverse way on societies around the country. Today the Taoiseach is visiting County Westmeath, the south of which, in particular Athlone, did not escape the floods. I understand that the \10 million provided is to assist in the relief of hardship for flood victims. I welcome the Taoiseach’s indication that this amount will be increased. I agree with Senator Twomey’s comments in regard to murders. There is a view obtaining among certain sections of society that one can pretty well do anything one wants and get away with it. I congratulate the Garda Síochána for its great successes in terms of drug seizures. However, I recently spoke with a high ranking member of the Garda who openly admitted to me that what they are achieving is only touching the tip of the iceberg, which is a sad admission. The Joint Policing Committees, JPCs, are to be rolled-out. I believe that these fora have great potential to assist the Garda Síochána in its fight against the drug barons. However, the Garda Síochána will not on its own defeat those involved in the drug trade. This is a matter for society. It is only through society supporting the Garda and agencies involved that the drug barons will be defeated. I ask the Deputy Leader to invite the Minister of State, Deputy Curran, an innovative young man in terms of his role in relation to drugs, to this House to debate this matter. While much has been achieved, we are not winning the battle.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I disagree fundamentally with Senators Ó Murchú and Quinn. It is political opportunism to say we should forget about the past when we know that past Govern- ment policies have brought us to where we are now. To learn from the past we must ensure we never again follow those policies. It was not the ordinary citizens but the high financiers in the banking profession, developers and Government policies pursued, in the main, by Fianna Fáil that brought us to where we are today. We should never forget that. To move forward, we must learn from the past. I do not blame public or private sector workers. I blame the Government and, in particular, Fianna Fáil which has been in power for the majority of the past 25 years.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator must put a question to the Deputy Leader.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: Yesterday, Oireachtas representatives from Cork met with the ESB to discuss the flooding in the city of Cork last weekend. I understand the Minister, Deputy Gormley, is frustrated at what has happened but it is wrong to blame councillors for this. The zoning of land does not automatically ensure planning permission. We all know that planning permission is the preserve not of the local council but of the planning authority. I call on the Deputy Leader to invite the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, to this House to discuss what he wants to see done in terms of the provision of relief to the people of Cork and throughout the country. 680 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

It is time — I hope the Deputy Leader agrees with me — an independent investigation into what happened in Cork was carried out, not to apportion blame but to ensure we learn from what happened and to assist us in alleviating the distress and hardship of the people of Cork and throughout Ireland. We must ensure we put in place an early flood warning system, proper communication and measures to ensure the Army, Civil Defence, Garda Síochána and fire brigade service are on active duty sooner rather than later.

Senator : I support the call by Senator McDonald for a debate on the recently launched report on the participation of women in politics. It was said to me recently that if Lehman Bros had been Lehman Sisters we would not be in the mess we are in today.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator must put a question to the Deputy Leader.

(Interruptions).

Senator Geraldine Feeney: It is obvious this is a male dominated Chamber. I call on the Deputy Leader to set aside some time next week for a debate on the long awaited report on child abuse in the Dublin diocese which is being launched this afternoon. It is welcome and long overdue. It will bring closure for some people but for others it will be a re-opening of the raw pain they had to live through. Could a couple of hours be set aside for a debate on the report? There is no point doing it the week after next. It is too bad the report is being published today and the House is not sitting tomorrow. As we have always said in this Chamber, one must strike while the iron is hot and while the topic is to the fore. I also compliment and congratulate the HSE on its foresight in putting extra counselling support in place in prep- aration for the avalanche of calls it will receive as a result of the publication of this terrible report.

Senator Rónán Mullen: I welcome the comments of Senator Healy Eames about the misuse, effectively, of what is called the student services charge. I raised this matter on the Adjourn- ment last night. Despite the fact that the Minister for Education and Science said recently that the student services charge is for the purposes of registration, examinations and facilities and services for students, the reality is that the block grant to colleges in respect of tuition fees for students has been cut back. It has been the policy going back to 2003, as instructed by the Higher Education Authority, that the cut in the block grant be compensated for by increasing the student services charge. It is completely bogus of the Government to claim that there is still a free fees system when the reality is that tuition fees have returned through the back door, and in the most dishonest fashion by being labelled a student services charge. It is no longer that, and there should be honesty about it.

Senator David Norris: It never was.

Senator Rónán Mullen: When I was in charge of student services in the then Dundalk Regional Technical College we had a hardship fund from which chaplains would disburse moneys to students who were hard up. We now find out that some students are still waiting to find out, at this late stage of the year with Christmas examinations approaching, whether they will receive a higher education grant. Some students are dropping out of college owing to financial hardship. This is an absolute disgrace. On the subject of hardship funds, the allocation of \10 million to people affected by flooding, when more than 100 houses have been damaged and more than 12 businesses compromised in Ballinasloe alone, appears to be a hardship fund that will do no more than help people in the short term. It is nothing like the compensation package that is needed. I heard this morning that the European Commission would provide \23 million if we could show that the damage 681 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

[Senator Rónán Mullen.] amounts to \1 billion. A serious challenge is facing us and I hope the Government is aware of this and will ratchet up the amount of money it will provide to help people in enormous distress.

Senator Maria Corrigan: I support the call by Senator O’Malley and Senator McDonald for a debate on domestic violence. A huge number of people in the State, many of whom are women, live every day of their lives in fear in a place that should be their refuge, their home. Holding a debate in this Chamber would be another step in raising awareness of this issue and sending a message to the people concerned, mainly women, that there is awareness of their plight and that help is available. Perhaps that debate, by showing solidarity and awareness and illustrating the help that is available, will help to build the victims’ confidence so they might come forward, seek help and try to move on from their appalling situation. No one deserves to live like that.

Senator Ciaran Cannon: One would get the sense from some contributions this morning that our flooding crisis is over and that we should be conducting a post mortem to establish how to prevent a recurrence. The flooding is far from over; in fact, it is only beginning. In Athlone this morning the water level of the River Shannon is 50 cm above the highest level every recorded. In south Galway ten more families were evacuated this morning while it appears that more water will be released downstream from Ardnacrusha. This is an ongoing national crisis and, as Senator Healy Eames said, it is a national emergency. There is a huge human cost associated with this and, having heard the Deputy Leader speak- ing in the past, I believe he has a sense of what that human cost is. It is the despair people throughout the country are feeling. This was compounded by the paltry offering of \12 million a couple of days ago to address their concerns. That indicates that either the Government was not aware of the costs people are enduring or, more worryingly, if it was, it was not according them any serious commitment. The level of funding must be racked up immediately and it must be publicised by splashing the information across the front page of every national news- paper and across the screens of every national television station. It is four weeks to Christmas Eve and thousands of families have given up hope that they will have any type of normal Christmas for themselves and their children. We must immediately tell these people that we are willing to write the same cheques we were willing to write six months ago for our banking system. They must be reassured that their Government is working in solidarity and community with them, something it has not been doing so far.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: As I listened to the contributions from all sides of the House on the need for a debate on the floods and the crisis facing our country I was reminded of a remark I heard last night by one of our finest novelists, Joseph O’Connor. He said on RTE last night that hope is the habit we need to acquire. This was brought home to me by the descriptions by my colleagues of the awful conditions so many families throughout the country are facing. An essential element of hope is that when politicians or governments set out an expectation of something they will do, they are then willing to make public statements about whether they can deliver that expectation. I am seeking debates on three issues in that context. First, I support the comments made by Senator Regan about the banking executives who said yester- day, with regard to the effect of NAMA bonds being released into the system, that lending was one of the options being considered. We must have a discussion about that when NAMA is up and running. What are the other options being considered in light of the fact that \54 billion is being released to the banks? 682 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

My second point relates to what happened yesterday with Anglo Irish Bank. It made public its intent to pursue legal action against a former employee of the bank. How have we arrived at the point where that bank can initiate legal proceedings before any State agency can——

Senator David Norris: It is a civil action.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: ——given the number of debates we have had about State action taking place in this area as a result of the malpractice that took place in the banking sector? Third, can the Deputy Leader guarantee that in the event of a social partnership arrangement being put in place between the Government and the different unions, the Government will immediately initiate a debate on the arrangement in the Houses of the Oireachtas?

Senator : I join Senator McDonald and Senator Feeney in seeking a debate on women’s participation in politics. The justice committee unanimously adopted, on a cross-party basis, the report on women’s participation in politics and its recommendations. Indeed, the committee recommended that the report be debated in both Houses of the Oireachtas. Perhaps we might steal a march on the other House by having that debate first in the Seanad. I challenge my male colleagues in the Chamber who have not yet spoken in favour of this debate to join their male colleagues in the justice committee in supporting this report and calling for a debate on it. I also ask the Deputy Leader to arrange a debate on the report of the Dublin diocesan inquiry into child abuse and the response of church and State authorities to that abuse. That debate must be held urgently, preferably early next week. I believe the report, which is due to be published this afternoon, will contain shocking revelations about inadequacies in the response of church and State authorities to the horrific levels of abuse perpetrated on children in the Dublin diocese over several decades. We must have a debate about the findings and recommendations of the report and examine the shortcomings in the responses of church and State and how to ensure they do not fall short in future so children are adequately protected. I have also called for a debate on the procedures by which the inquiry was conducted and through which the Minister is entitled to go to the High Court to seek the deletion of aspects of the report for fear that they might compromise future prosecutions. We must debate the section in the legislation that facilitates the Minister in this regard to ensure further reports are not unnecessarily cut. I welcome this afternoon’s publication of the report and hope that we can debate its findings soon.

An Cathaoirleach: Three Members have indicated that they wish to contribute, but time is practically up. If they are brief, I will call them.

Senator : Does the Deputy Leader have any information regarding the Property Services (Regulation) Bill 2009? It has been a considerable time since its Second Stage. When is it intended to have Committee Stage? The Bill’s necessity has waned because of the state of the market and so on, but the regulatory body provided for under the Bill exists in shadow form in plush offices in Navan with nothing to do, which is wasteful. The situation needs to be clarified.

Senator : Will the Deputy Leader arrange a debate on the progress of Dublin’s integrated transport network, particularly about whether the metro is, if the House will excuse the pun, on line? The debate would refer to the integration of DART and bus services, any increased levels of subvention to CIE and Dublin Bus that may be required and competition.

683 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

[Senator Ivor Callely.]

Will the Deputy Leader clarify two policy issues regarding the Department of Health and Children? The first relates to care of the elderly at home and increased levels of support for same and the second relates to the use of generic drugs. I might be the poacher turned gamekeeper in respect of the latter, as I started my career in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals, but I commend the successful European campaign on stopping the unnecessary use of antibiotics. They are widely misused, as they are of no use against the common cold, a cough, the flu or swine flu. They are only effective against bacterial infections, a fact highlighted in the recent campaign.

Senator Joe O’Reilly: Like other colleagues, I appeal to the Deputy Leader to allow time for a full debate on agriculture and the plight of farmers. The recent flooding has worsened the already dire situation of farmers. For several years, they have been hit by low product prices, below cost production and a range of grant and subsidy cutbacks. Their position is difficult. People I know are using family savings, cashing in insurance policies and running up bills in local hardware shops and fertiliser and meal companies. This merits a serious debate. Through the Deputy Leader, could a message be passed to the Government? As we approach the Christmas season and in the midst of our adversity, could we hold on to the principles of Christian charity and values that we have held for generations? The budget should make no further cuts in the overseas aid package. Will the Deputy Leader make this request of the Government on our behalf? We should do what is right and support those who are in a worse position. We should not scapegoat overseas aid. Other solutions must be found.

Senator Dan Boyle: I thank Members for their contributions. Senator Twomey called for the ongoing flooding crisis to be designated as a national emergency. The Government is treating the situation with suitable seriousness and appropriate attention. Providing whatever desig- nation and resources are required to meet it are the Government’s responsibility and I am confident that such will be done. The initial allocation of funds is not meant to be taken as a remedy for the costs that are piling up. Further resources will be made available. Other Senators referred to accessing the European solidarity fund. I am confident that it will be accessed. As Senator Mullen described, however, it will only partially meet the costs incurred in many communities. Insurance must be paid out quickly and appropriately. There is a role for various Government agencies to see this is done. Senator O’Toole mentioned the mythical aspect of Shannon drainage and how it has been treated in our——

Senator Joe O’Toole: It was a political promise.

Senator Dan Boyle: ——political system. It has been more talked about than done. The Senator gave the concrete example of the prescient Doherty report, upon which State auth- orities can and should act. The proposal that it be debated in the House is a valuable one, as it will help in taking further action. Senator Alex White discussed the Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill, which has completed Committee Stage and will be taken on Report Stage next week, and the inclusion of measures regarding the discouragement of developments on flood plains. He made the appo- site point that if the Bill can be strengthened in this regard, it should be. The House should take the opportunity to do so when the Bill reverts to it.

684 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

Senator Leyden highlighted the seriousness of flooding in the Shannon region and proposed the use of a fund by the Irish Red Cross, the designated body, for the alleviation of hardship. His suggestion will be put to the appropriate people and taken on board. Senator John Paul Phelan made the link with the consequences of flooding for agriculture where farm incomes have already been badly hit. In this, he was joined by Senators Regan, Bradford and O’Reilly. A special debate in this regard has been requested. If this can be acceded to, it should be. The difficulty with debates at the end of a parliamentary session, as all Senators are aware, is that we already have a considerable legislation programme. We will be sitting more days and for longer until the end of this session. If we have an opportunity to schedule such a debate, I will see that Senators’ views are taken on board. Senator Ormonde discussed using the wisdom and experience of county managers and engin- eers. I would add the phrase “where such wisdom and experience exists”. While Senator Buttimer pointed out that councillors should not be blamed for zoning, other levels of local government have responsibility for allowing planning permissions in flood plains. As a Legis- lature, we should not be slow in saying this and in examining how responsibility should be accorded through legislation. Early in the new year via the new local government Bill, we will have an opportunity to determine how county managers should be made more responsible and should take accountability for poor decisions. Senator Quinn used the flooding as an analogy for taking greater collective and personal responsibility for our economic situation. He was joined by Senator Ó Murchú. Senator Quinn used the example of the divergence of Canada and Argentina during the past century in terms of their economic well-being. When we achieved independence in the early 1920s, we were considered wealthier than many Scandinavian countries. By the advent of the Celtic tiger, though, we were lagging behind them. As we recover from the Celtic tiger, there are many divergences between us and comparable European countries that we need to correct, as well as deal with the impact of the economic recession, but the point has been well made. The need for a debate about the wider sense of how we, as a society, can deal with these changes, outside of the debate we will be having next week on pre-budget statements, is something that will be given consideration. Senator Hanafin, on flooding, spoke of the need for a national recovery plan, and how we might work in concert with the Cumbrian region, which suffered devastating consequences owing to the same weather patterns, and how this might help in terms of a joint application to the European Union. That is a proposal that will be sent to the appropriate people. Senator Cummins asked for a debate on the Defence Force numbers and for the Minister for Defence to come into the Chamber. That is certainly something that will be taken on board. The Senator also agreed with Senator Twomey on the need for a debate on violent crime, instancing the horrible event yesterday in County Wicklow where a shopkeeper needlessly lost his life as a result of protecting an employee and his business. In that, he was joined by Senator Glynn. The House would welcome such a debate. It is a question of timing and I would ask the Opposition groups in the Seanad that of the remaining Private Members’ time remaining in this session, some thought be given to have debates on issues like this. There are demands for a Private Members’ Bill and other issues to be addressed as well, but it would certainly help in having these issues addressed. Senator Norris raised the equality infrastructure in terms of State agencies. I have some sympathy for that. We no longer have the Combat Poverty Agency, but the proposals that were being made on the Irish Human Rights Commission and the Equality Authority have been stymied, and both are still in place and being given additional resources. 685 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

Senator David Norris: Well done to Senator Boyle’s party.

Senator Dan Boyle: The Senator also pointed out the proposals on community development projects. It also is something for which I have sympathy. As someone with a community back- ground, I believe that while there is scope for saving in these areas, the current proposals, which are being introduced over the period of a year to see how they might be refined and to allow an opportunity for debate as to how the eventual decisions will pan out, look at the wrong end of the pipe. They look in the local communities themselves where the valuable work is being done by development projects and where there is a sense of enablement and empowerment. They do not look at the other of the pipe where often there is an unnecessary and costly bureaucracy, which is being left in place and is not being tackled to achieve effective use of public money. A debate along those lines would be useful in this House. Senator Regan also asked a question on NAMA and the role of the European Commission. This House will be kept fully informed of how the European Commission deals with the pro- posals. He also referred to yesterday’s meeting of the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service, as did Senator Donohoe. I must admit that some of the comments of banking executives showed that lessons are being learned very slowly. This House can never lose sight of the fact that as the banks had to be rescued owing at the very least to incompetence, the people making these submissions to Oireachtas committees need to be a little more honest and forthcoming in how they deal with this ongoing crisis.

Senator : The Minister has all the power.

Senator Dan Boyle: Senator McDonald, along with Senators Corrigan and Bacik, raised the 16-day campaign against domestic violence which is organised by the Women’s Aid organis- ation, of which a useful monitoring presentation was given yesterday. Obviously, the issues that organisation and the Members were highlighting deserve consideration in this House. There was also a harmony between the Seanad’s equivalent of the Lehman sisters——

Senator Ivana Bacik: I am flattered to be addressed as one of the Lehman sisters.

Senator Rónán Mullen: I hope they do not go bust.

Senator Dan Boyle: ——on the question of a debate on women in politics. The report of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Right is a valuable one. There will be a related section in an ongoing report being undertaken at present by the Joint Commit- tee on the Constitution, of which Senators Alex White, Regan and O’Donovan, and myself, are members, and I would suggest that maybe when the two reports are together would be the ideal time to have such a debate, which will be in the very near future.

Senator Ivana Bacik: We would prefer it sooner.

An Cathaoirleach: The Deputy Leader is replying to the Order of Business.

Senator Dan Boyle: It is about results. Senator McDonald also brought up the question of the carbon tax and how it is applied. Many Members might not have been aware, but the library and research service organised an excellent presentation yesterday in the AV room by Professor John Fitzgerald of the Economic and Social Research Institute where he spoke of how a carbon tax can be applied and how many of the concerns of many can be addressed in the application of the tax. I think we will have a debate come budget day as to how this is panning out. 686 Order of 26 November 2009. Business

Senator Bradford also spoke of an issue raised initially by Senator Twomey, namely, the report by the National Economic and Social Forum on home care packages. Senator Buttimer might have been a member of the committee that produced that report. It is a useful report. It states that the policy is necessary and important, but also points out where inefficiencies exist, how there is a disparity between different parts of the country and how economies are not being achieved as a result. There have been calls for the report to be debated in this House, and if and when the time can be provided, that too would be a useful debate. Senator Healy Eames raised the worsening and ongoing flooding situation, and greater use of the Army. While criticisms have been made by some Members of the timeliness of response by various emergency services, there is a recognition that as and when the Army, the Fire Service and the Garda could be used, they have been used and their members have made a big contribution towards the efforts to alleviate the devastation caused in recent days. Senator Healy Eames, along with Senator Mullen, brought up the question of the student services charge. I am not in a position to decide whether this is a charge that will be increased or not. That is a decision that will be made elsewhere but the comments of both Members will be noted. Senator Glynn spoke of how the flooding is affecting the Westmeath area, and Athlone in particular, and stressed the Taoiseach’s visit. In addressing the views of many Senators this morning, it should be noted that the Taoiseach and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, have travelled widely, and the Minister of State at the Department of Finance with responsibility for the Office of Public Works, Deputy Mansergh, has visited many of the areas, but at the end of the day it is delivering the services on the ground and dealing with the situation that really matters. This is something that is being kept under review. Senator Buttimer asked for an investigation to be held into the role of ESB with the Innis- carra dam in the Cork flooding situation. I would support such an investigation being held. I do not believe that there would not have been flooding in Cork, but the purpose of an independent investigation could be to see whether the flooding was exacerbated by the actions taken or otherwise, or whether further flooding was stopped by taking appropriate action. It is important in terms of public confidence that such an investigation happens. Senators Feeney and Bacik brought up the question of the report into abuse of children in the Dublin diocese being released today. This will be an important report. It is not being released in its ideal form, but it is anticipated it will contain many items of public concern. The review of the programme for Government contains an agreement to implement the findings of the recent Ryan report, which runs parallel to this. This will inform that process, but the need for an immediate debate is something this House can and should address. I will see whether that can be organised. Senator Mullen raised the existence of hardship funds for people affected by the flooding. From his part of the world, he will have first-hand experience, as some of us from the southern region have, of the devastation of the flooding. We will see how that can pan out. Senator Cannon, who is also from that part of the world, pointed out that the flooding crisis continues. As I said in yesterday’s debate, there is a recurring threat. We need the means to ensure that we can deal not only with the current crisis, but also prepare for future flooding. That will require investment in and changes to our emergency services. Senator Donohoe asked about the banking sector, which I referred to in terms of the Com- mittee on Finance and the Public Service, concerning the role of Anglo Irish Bank. I will have to get information on that specific question. I am not too sure whether Anglo Irish Bank, which is now a State-owned bank, is seen as having any priority over any other State agency. If I can 687 European Council Decisions: 26 November 2009. Motions

[Senator Dan Boyle.] obtain that information I will be happy to pass it on to the Senator. Senator Donohoe also requested that if there is an agreement between the trade unions and the Government on public service costs, it should be discussed in this House. As someone who has spoken on the issue of social partnership in the past, I would be happy to have such a debate in the House. Senator Coghlan asked about Committee Stage of the Property Services (Regulation) Bill. He is correct that the Bill has been discussed in the House on Second Stage and awaits dis- cussion on Committee Stage. Its priority has been overtaken by recent events, but as soon as a window of opportunity becomes available, we can proceed with Committee Stage of that Bill. Senator Callely asked about plans for integrated transport, but that is dependent on decisions to be made in the budget. None the less, such a debate in this House would be useful. The Senator also referred to the excessive use of antibiotics. I am not particularly good at Greek but I believe that the word “antibiotic” means “against life”. Such a debate on the use of pharmaceutical products is ongoing in society at large, so it should be discussed in this House also. Senator Glynn wants the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs to address the House on the drugs issue. A request will be made for such a debate because that is a matter of concern for Members of the House. Senator Joe O’Reilly sought a debate on overseas development aid and I have a personal sympathy with that subject. There has been a decrease in the value of our gross domestic product and we have cut \220 million from the ODA budget in recent years. It is difficult politically to decide on such issues when we are making decisions about those in need in our own society. My own preference would be to seek to maintain ODA levels in percentage terms and indicate how we will meet the 2012 target. I think I have covered all the points that were raised and I thank Members for their con- tributions.

Senator Paddy Burke: On a point of order, will there be any extra sitting days to deal with all those issues?

An Cathaoirleach: It is not a point of order, but the Leader will be in touch with us at a later date concerning that matter.

A Senator: On 25 December.

Order of Business agreed to.

European Council Decisions: Motions. Senator Dan Boyle: I move:

That Seanad Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion pro- vided by Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take part in the adoption the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Council Decision concerning the signing of the Agreement between the European Union and Japan on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Seanad Éireann on the 12th November, 2009.

Senator Ivana Bacik: On a point of order, I think we are doing Nos. 1 to 4 without debate. 688 European Council Decisions: 26 November 2009. Motions

An Cathaoirleach: Yes.

Senator Ivana Bacik: I should say that I was on the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights yesterday when these matters arose. Although we supported them on the Opposition side, we did express concern at the lack of information and time for debate that was allocated to that committee. We are conscious that there will effectively be a tsunami of such measures coming before us by virtue of the Lisbon Treaty. Therefore I want to put on the record the concerns expressed by Opposition spokespersons at yesterday’s com- mittee meeting concerning the lack of time and lack of background information provided on these measures. I stress, however, that we did not oppose them. None the less, I wanted to put that on the record.

Question put and agreed to.

Senator Dan Boyle: I move:

That Seanad Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion pro- vided by Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take part in the adoption of the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Council Decision concerning the signing of the Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Seanad Éireann on 17th November, 2009.

Question put and agreed to.

Senator Dan Boyle: I move:

That Seanad Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion pro- vided by Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take part in the adoption of the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Council Framework Decision on Accreditation of forensic service pro- viders carrying out laboratory activities,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Seanad Éireann on the 3rd day of November 2009.

Question put and agreed to.

Senator Dan Boyle: I move:

That Seanad Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion pro- vided by Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to consent to the adoption by the European Union of the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Council Framework Decision on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings, and protecting victims, repealing Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Seanad Éireann on the 4th day of November 2009.

Question put and agreed to. 689 Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009: 26 November 2009. Report and Final Stages

Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009 [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil]: Report and Final Stages. An Leas-Chathaoirleach: This is a Seanad Bill which has been amended by the Dáil. In accordance with Standing Order 113 it is deemed to have passed its First, Second and Third Stages in the Seanad and is placed on the Order Paper for Report Stage. On the question “That the Bill be received for final consideration”, the Minister may explain the purpose of the amendments made by the Dáil. This is looked upon as a report of the Dáil amendments to the Seanad. I remind Senators that the only matters that may be discussed are the amendments made by the Dáil. For the convenience of Senators, I have arranged for the printing and circulation of those amendments to them. The Minister will deal separately with the subject matter of each related group of amendments. I have also circulated the proposed groupings in the House. A Senator may contribute once on each grouping. I welcome the Minister for Transport to the House and call on him to speak on the subject matter of amendments in group one.

Question proposed: “That the Bill be received for final consideration.”

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): Section 10 outlines general provisions for the consideration of the applications for the grant of bus licences. Amendment No. 1 relates to section 10(2), which was discussed at an earlier sitting of this House. Some suggestions were made which we took on board. Section 10(2) allows the authority to consider submissions for or on behalf of a licence applicant to invite submissions of information from the applicant or any other party, and to examine any other matter that it deems to be relevant to the public interest in the consideration of an application. The amendment introduces a specific reference to a local authority in subsection (2)(b) to clarify that, for the purposes of considering an application for the grant of a licence, the authority may seek the views of any local authority in whose functional area the proposed public passenger service will operate. The nature of the amendment and the discretion it gives to the authority recognises that not all bus licence applications would warrant a specific input from individual local authorities. Occasional licences for once-off events, for example, are unlikely to give rise to the need for detailed consideration by individual local authorities. This was discussed at the earlier sitting and I indicated that I would try to accommodate local authorities.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I welcome the Minister back to the House. This appears to be a sensible amendment and follows the discussions we had here at an earlier sitting of the House. I have two questions for the Minister. First, in the text that is being amended, the word “or” will now disappear. The original text included the words “public bus service will operate, or”. It then went into paragraph (c) to state “examining any other matter that it deems to be relevant”. Is there any particular reason why that change has been made? Second, does the Minister have in mind any timings within which he expects the input to come back from local authorities? It is a good improvement to seek the input of local auth- orities in this regard. It is vital, however, that the whole procedure happens in a timely manner and that the slow delivery of input from any particular body should not get in the way of a decision being made on this matter.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: The Senator is correct in that the word “or” does not appear in the amendment, but it is still in the main body of the Bill.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: Okay. 690 Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009: 26 November 2009. Report and Final Stages

Deputy Noel Dempsey: There is no specific timeline for receiving the views of any local authority. That will be left to the discretion of the authority itself. It may seek the views of a local authority in whatever timescale it deems necessary.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I call the Minister on group 2.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: Section 13 allows the authority to apply conditions to the grant of licences. Subsection (4) has been amended following consideration of issues raised both in this House and in the Dáil. The subsection now provides that the authority shall 12 o’clock require the details of a licence to be displayed in the vehicle providing the service, save where the authority deems it not to be appropriate. Senators will remember we had a long discussion on this. A strong view was expressed in this House in particular that licence details should be displayed in a vehicle. I argued at the time this would not be appro- priate for once-off events. However, what we have done meets the concerns of the Senators in that it will be the norm or default position for the licence to be displayed in the vehicle. I hope this meets the requirements of the Seanad.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I thank the Minister for making this change. The display of licences was discussed in the House and we put forward the case for the change. We had a similar discussion on the display of timetables for passenger services. I felt it was very important that there be an obligation on providers of public bus passenger services to display timetables. I am glad the Minister has made the change with regard to the display of licences but I wonder why he did not make a similar change with regard to the need to supply and make publicly available a timetable.

Senator Brendan Ryan: The amendment is welcome. The only fear I have — I have such fears regarding a range of legislative provisions — is that the default position of the authority will involve it deeming the display of licences inappropriate.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: The legislation is now worded such that the default position is that the licence must be displayed. That is the normal position and how it should always be. It is only in exceptional cases that the licence will not be displayed. The argument for displaying timetables is not as strong because we are referring to different kinds of services. It is not necessary to display them for once-off events, nor is it necessary where there is a point-to-point service. It is not feasible to require the display of timetables but, in most cases where there is a service to be provided, the company trying to promote it and sell tickets must provide timetables to the public to inform them of the service and attract business. It is not as necessary to include the display of timetables in the legislation because it will probably be done as a matter of practice, where relevant.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Group three, encompassing amendments Nos. 3, 4 and 5, con- cerns guidelines.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: This group relates to section 23 of the Bill, which provides that the authority shall prepare and publish guidelines on the licensing regime established under Part 2. The section establishes requirements for broad public consultation on the draft guidelines and the submission of written representations to the authority for consideration prior to finalis- ation and formal publication. Amendment No. 3 provides that the authority must submit a draft of the guidelines to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport for its opinion, which must be submitted to the 691 Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009: 26 November 2009. Report and Final Stages

[Deputy Noel Dempsey.] authority within one month. Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 are consequential in that they provide that the authority must consider the opinion of the committee and set out a definition of the committee, respectively. This latter definition is the same as that used in section 12(11)(d)of the Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008. This arose largely from a Dáil debate expressing a desire to give specific recognition to the Oireachtas joint committees and the role they play in transport affairs.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: Amendment No. 3 is welcome but I have a question for the Minister thereon. Based on his response, he envisages that the Joint Committee on Transport will be the committee with an input. Would it be worth making a change to allow for more than one Oireachtas committee to have an input, or at least thinking about allowing this? The Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, for example, might well have a view on the operation of the authority when it is considering changes to planning guidelines. I make this point in the context of the fact that the national authority will have the ability to make a contribution to regional planning guidelines for areas outside Dublin. With this in mind, it might be worth allowing an Oireachtas committee other than the Joint Commit- tee on Transport to make a submission. It appears from the legislation that only the Joint Committee on Transport is given this role at present.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: There is absolutely nothing in the Bill that prevents any other com- mittee or any other member of a committee from making a formal submission. The provision as it stands, which is appropriate, gives the power of consideration specifically to the Joint Committee on Transport. It is the committee that will be focusing on transport issues. I take the Deputy’s point on the Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment but he should note it can make a separate submission. We are providing statutorily for the making of a submission by the Joint Committee on Transport but another committee can make a submission within the specified period. Any submission, be it by a committee, individual or local authority, will have to be considered and taken into account before a final decision is made on the guidelines.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Group 4 concerns the make-up of the authority and it is the subject matter of amendment No. 6.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: This has arisen because we are moving from a Dublin transport authority that was to have nine members to a national transport authority. While I may not necessarily appoint 11 members to the latter authority, 11 would be a more appropriate number for a national transport authority. The amendment, which is to section 14(2)(d), requires that the chairperson and eight ordi- nary members, as opposed to the original six, shall be appointed from persons who, in the opinion of the Minister, have “wide experience in relation to transport, industrial, commercial, financial, land use planning or environmental matters, the organisation of workers or admini- stration”. It was suggested this appears to read as if any person appointed must have wide experience in all those areas. That is not the intent of the legislation; the intent is that appointees will have experience in as many of them as possible, but at least one.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Group 5 concerns technical and drafting issues and comprises the subject matter of amendment No. 7.

Deputy Noel Dempsey: Amendment No. 7 is a technical amendment to substitute the term “public bus services” for “public bus passenger services” in sections 48, 52 and 54 of the Dublin 692 Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009: 26 November 2009. Report and Final Stages

Transport Authority Act 2008. This is a technical amendment in the interest of consistency between the 2008 Act and the provisions of the Bill. This was pointed out to us during the course of consultation on the Act.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Senator Ryan indicated he wished to comment on group 3. He could ask that question now.

Senator Brendan Ryan: I do not remember it, but it related to seeking the opinion of the Oireachtas joint committee. Is there any obligation on the authority to take its opinion on board in any way or is it open to it just to seek the opinion of the committee and then com- pletely ignore it?

Deputy Noel Dempsey: Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 provide that the authority must consider the opinion of the committee and set out a definition of that opinion. It is not just a matter that the committee’s opinion is sought and ignored. It has to be considered fully and decided on. Bill reported with amendments.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: When is it proposed to take the next Stage?

Senator John Ellis: Now.

Question proposed: “That the Bill do now pass.”

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I thank the House for its co-operation. This Bill started in the House. It is an historic Bill because it replaces a 77 year old Act that dates to 1932. There has been much talk over the years about changing and reforming that Bill. I thank in particular the Members of Seanad Éireann and the staff for the co-operation I received in initiating the Bill and ensuring we got a good debate and sufficient time to discuss it in detail. I also thank the officials of the House and my officials for their hard work on the Bill. Perhaps other staff in the section of the Department dealing with the Bill will not mind if I single out Mr. John Weafer. Many Members have had contact with him. It might be the last time he is in the House to assist with the passing of legislation. I wish him well and thank everyone for their co-operation.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I thank the Minister for his consistent approach to legislation in the House, his willingness to listen to points that have been made and to act upon them. Our party voted against the Bill in the Seanad and the Dáil because of our belief that we could do more to get better value for the money that is being spent in this area and to introduce choice in how bus services are provided. That said, as the Minister acknowledged, the Bill is the first major legislation in this area since 1932. That is definite progress. More progress could have been made but we welcome the fact that progress is being made. When the National Transport Authority is set up it will have a weighty responsibility for our country in terms of making sure we have a proper transport strategy in place that works. I am interested in two areas in particular. The first is how directly elected mayors, which the Government intends to introduce, will be incorporated, especially for the city of Dublin and the region of Dublin. How that is dealt with will be vital. The second point is that there were features of the Dublin Transport Authority, DTA, that could have been maintained in the new national transport authority. As I outlined on Second Stage, I would like to have maintained the ability of the Dublin Transport Authority to draw up a transport strategy for the Dublin region. The stronger ability of the DTA to get involved in planning guidelines was a welcome development and I would have liked that to be maintained in the national transport authority. 693 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

[Senator Paschal Donohoe.] That said, these are developments that can take place over time as the body gets up and running. I wish it well. Given that this might be Mr. Weafer’s last time to be involved in legislation in the House I thank him for his work and the support he has given Opposition Members when we have been working on transport legislation in recent years. I also thank my colleagues for the help they gave me on Committee Stage.

Senator Brendan Ryan: I welcome the passing of this much-needed legislation. On Second Stage and Committee Stage we talked about the problems caused by having two pieces of separate legislation governing public transport and private transport. I refer in particular to the 41X issue in my constituency. I hope that is now behind us. I called for a level playing field. I hope that is what emerges and that there will not be a favouring of the private transport sector over the public transport sector. Due regard should be taken of the good work done by Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus. I hope there will be a level playing field. The amendments that came back from the Dáil pretty much reflect the discussion that took place on the Bill in this House before it went to the Dáil. I am happy enough and do not have any difficulty with them. I thank the Minister for bringing them back to this House and attempting to deal with them. I wish the legislation well. I thank the Minister and his depart- mental officials for their tremendous work.

Senator John Ellis: I wish to be associated with the remarks to Mr. John Weafer who has been very helpful to some of us for a long time. Any time he was approached he was more than helpful. That was very much appreciated by Members across the House. The Bill does a long overdue tidying up job given that the previous Act was in place for 77 years. Public transport at that stage was a total monopoly and at least this Bill will change the situation and make progress in terms of what is available to the public. I compliment the Minister on allowing the Bill to begin in the Seanad. Some times we do not get the necessary opportunity to take Bills first in this House and they come to us from the Dáil as a fait accompli. This Bill was well teased out in this House. When anomalies were pointed out to the Minister he was more than willing to accept amendments, irrespective of which side of the House they came from. That is positive as far as any legislation is concerned. I thank the Minister and his staff and the staff of the House for the way they helped us to deal with the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.

Public Transport Regulation Bill 2009: Motion for Earlier Signature. Senator John Ellis: I move:

That pursuant to subsection 2° of section 2 of Article 25 of the Constitution, Seanad Éireann concurs with the Government in a request to the President to sign the Public Trans- port Regulation Bill 2009 on a date which is earlier than the fifth day after the date on which the Bill shall have been presented to her.

Question put and agreed to.

Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Kelleher. 694 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.

SECTION 3.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Amendments Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are consequential on amendment No. 5, so we will discuss amendments Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Government amendment No. 1: In page 5, lines 6 and 7, to delete all words from and including “(as” in line 6 down to and including “2001)” in line 7.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Billy Kelleher): Amendment No. 5, as published, is to allow the Minister to make recommendations to recognise stock exchanges outside the State so companies can make the equivalent of a market purchase of its own shares on those exchanges. Part 11 of the Companies Act 1990 provides that a market purchase occurs when a company purchases its own shares on a recog- nised stock exchange. Market purchases must be authorised by a company at a general meeting and this authorisation is sufficient for all contracts for purchase of own shares for the period of the authorisation. That period is usually 18 months. Subsequent to the purchase there are obligations on the company to register purchases with the Companies Registration Office and to notify the relevant exchange on which the purchase was made. The exchange may then publicise the purchase. For the purchase of own shares on stock exchanges that are not recognised, the terms of each individual contract for purchase of the shares must be authorised in advance by a special resolution of the company. Currently, the Irish Stock Exchange is the only recognised exchange for market purchase of own shares. The recognition of other exchanges is being made to facili- tate international groups that are relocating their parent undertaking to Ireland and that wish to make market purchases of their own shares which are not listed on the Irish Stock Exchange. The proposed amendment creates a new type of purchase called an overseas market pur- chase. This type of purchase will require the same authorisation as a market purchase and notification to the Companies Registration Office but as the stock exchanges on which the purchase is made will be outside the jurisdiction, a new notification requirement is being intro- duced. This will be an obligation on the company to publicise its purchase of own shares on the company website for not less than 28 days. Amendment No. 2 as published extends the definition of recognised stock exchange so that it can include exchanges outside the State as well as individual markets on an exchange. Amendments Nos. 1, 3, and 4 are consequential to the above amendments.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I want to make a broad point on this. These amendments are nearly as long as the legislation we discussed on Second Stage last week. The legislation before the House last week was about two particular points: the exemption of accounting standards for limited periods of time and the appointment of company inspectors and the liability to the State as a result. We are making changes in those two areas. I would appreciate the Minister of State’s clarification on this if I am wrong but, in effect, these amendments will introduce a new area in the Bill. It is not a huge change from the discussion we had in the House last week. It concerns the purchase of company shares, especially from overseas. I can understand the reason for the amendment but it is introducing a new part to the Bill. It is not just amending what was in place. It is new. 695 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

[Senator Paschal Donohoe.]

Why could something like this not have formed part of the original Bill which we discussed last week? These amendments constitute a new provision in the Bill and put a new capability on it that was not in place last week. It is a different Bill as a result of this amendment. It is ranging into a different area. It might only be a small area but it is still a different area of competence in regard to the Bill we debated last week. I would be interested to know why that is the case and why it could not have formed part of the original Bill we discussed.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: I can agree with everything the Senator said. The difficulty is that these were not ready for drafting at the time the Bill was debated in the Seanad. That highlights the importance of the Seanad and our parliamentary system in that we can introduce amend- ments from time to time and have a discussion on them. The reason behind this is to ensure the companies that will avail of the transition this legis- lation will allow need this measure quickly for accounting purposes. This legislation must be passed by the end of the year to allow them prepare their accounts on solid ground, so to speak, knowing what they have to comply with. For that reason it is critical we get this legis- lation through the House. Introducing this amendment is of key importance to ensure the companies that will avail of the changes in accounting practices will also be some of the com- panies that may avail of the proposal in this amendment. That is the reason for it. It was not ready at the time of drafting but we can now have the discussion on it in the context of Committee Stage.

Amendment agreed to.

Government amendment No. 2: In page 5, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following: “(a) in section 3(2), by substituting the following for paragraph (a): “(a) A recognised stock exchange for the purposes of any provision of the Companies Acts is an exchange or a market, whether within or outside the State, prescribed by the Minister for the purposes of that provision.”,”.

Amendment agreed to.

Government amendment No. 3: In page 5, paragraph (a), line 9, to delete “£250,000,”, and” and substitute “£250,000,”,”.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I have a question on that. I may have missed it in the Minister of State’s contribution, and apologies if I did——

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I cannot let the Senator in at this stage but I will allow him speak on the section.

Amendment agreed to.

Government amendment No. 4: In page 5, paragraph (b), line 13, to delete “£250,000.”.” and substitute “£250,000.”,”.

Amendment agreed to.

Government amendment No. 5: 696 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

In page 5, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “(c) in section 212— (i) in subsection (1)(b), by inserting “within the State” after “exchange”, (ii) by inserting the following subsection after subsection (1): “(1A) For the purposes of sections 215, 226, 226A and 229, a purchase by a company that issues shares, or by a subsidiary of that company, of the first-mentioned company’s shares, is an ‘overseas market purchase’ if the shares are purchased on a recognised stock exchange outside the State and are subject to a marketing arrangement.”, and (iii) in subsection (2), by deleting “subsection (1)” and substituting “subsections (1) and (1A)”, (d) in section 215(1), by inserting “or overseas market purchase” after “market purchase” in each place where it occurs, (e) in section 226(1), by inserting “or, in the case of an overseas market purchase, within 3 working days,” after “28 days”, (f) by inserting the following section after section 226: 226A.—(1) Whenever shares for which dealing facilities are provided on a recognised stock exchange are the subject of an overseas market purchase either by the company which issued the shares or by a company which is that company’s subsidiary, the company which issued the shares shall publish, on its website for a continuous period of not less than 28 days beginning on the day that next follows the overseas market purchase concerned and is a day on which the recognised stock exchange concerned is open for business, or in any other prescribed manner, the following information: (a) the date and time of the overseas market purchase; (b) the price at which the shares were purchased; (c) the number of shares which were purchased; (d) the recognised stock exchange on which the shares were purchased. (2) If default is made in complying with this section, the company and every officer of the company who is in default shall be guilty of an offence.”, and (g) in section 229(1), by inserting “, other than when the purchase was an overseas market purchase,” after “subsidiary”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

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

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach for his forbearance. I may have missed it in the Minister of State’s contribution, and apologies if I did, but could he explain the effect of amendments Nos. 3 and 4? What is the effect of deleting “£250,000,”, and” in amendment No. 3 and “£250,000.”.” in amendment No. 4? It appears to me that it is being reinserted.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: It is merely to correct the reading of the Bill. There are no significant changes other than that we are deleting an “and” after “£250,000” and also the comma in page 697 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

[Deputy Billy Kelleher.] 5, paragraph (b), line 13. It is a grammatical correcting of the Bill. They are technical amendments.

Question put and agreed to.

NEW SECTION.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Amendment No. 6 is a Government amendment. Amendment No. 7 is consequential on amendment No. 6. The amendments may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Government amendment No. 6: In page 5, before section 4, to insert the following new section: “4.—(1) Section 27 of the Companies (Auditing and Accounting) Act 2003 is amended— (a) by substituting the following for subsection (1): “(1) The Supervisory Authority may delegate some or all of its functions and powers under sections 23 to 26 to a committee established for that purpose and consisting of persons from one or more of the following categories of persons: (a) persons who are, at the time the committee is established, directors of the Authority, (b) other persons that the Authority considers appropriate.”, and (b) by inserting in subsection (4) “, including the determination of whether a matter should be referred to a committee established for a purpose referred to in subsection (1)” after “behalf”. (2) For the avoidance of doubt, a committee that was established under subsection (1) of section 27 of the Companies (Auditing and Accounting) Act 2003 prior to the commence- ment of section 4 of the Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 shall be deemed to have been properly constituted, and shall be deemed to have and to have had all the powers necessary to perform its functions notwithstanding that any of its members was a director when he or she was appointed to the committee but ceased to be such a director before the completion of the enquiry, investigation or review for which it was established.”.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: This amendment is to ensure continuity of membership by directors of committees of inquiry established by the Irish Auditing and Accounting Supervisory Authority, IAASA. Section 27 of the Companies (Auditing and Accounting) Act sets out the manner in which committees of inquiry of IAASA are constituted. The proposed amendment No. 6 is necessary as the term of office of one of the current directors of IAASA is due to expire in January 2010. That director was a member of a committee of inquiry by virtue of being a director and the concern was that the work of the committee would continue beyond January 2010, the expiry date of the term of office of the director concerned. At the expiry of his term of office, the director would no longer have an entitlement to his place on the committee which would cause the membership of the committee to change during the inquiry. A change in the make-up of a committee during an inquiry could raise questions of due process and fair pro- cedures and may leave the process open to challenge by way of judicial review. The proposed amendment provides that a person who is a director at the time of the forma- tion of such a committee will be entitled to continue on that committee until the inquiry is 698 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage completed. This will ensure the membership of the committee does not change during an inquiry and, therefore, due process and fair procedures will be observed in this regard. The amendment will also ensure staff of IAASA can make preliminary enquiries into matters that come to the attention of IAASA before deciding whether such matters should be submit- ted to the board for further inquiry. The amendment will also provide that enquiries already ongoing will not be affected by proposed changes. Amendment No. 7 is consequential and simply adds reference to the 2003 Act in the Long Title of the Bill.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I should declare an interest. I am the director involved in this situation as a member of an inquiry committee. The real issue for the supervisory authority is a critical one. These are very litigious times. There has not been a week in recent months where a Member of this House has not asked a question about who is carrying out the investigation into this or that latest scandal from banking areas. It is a very litigious area, as we have seen. We saw one court case go up and down the structures of the court and back again. As a young authority the supervisory authority is concerned that were there to be a successful challenge against the authority, we would appear to be ineffective, not doing our duty, etc. Every care is being taken on the issues being dealt with here. One of them is the delegation of authority from the board to the sub-committee. Effectively, if we are examining something being done by the accountants or auditors of a stated bank or whatever, two sub-committees of the board are set up. One is the preliminary inquiry committee which establishes whether there is prima facie evidence to be examined in detail. It is completely separate from the board and its minutes are not available to it. That sub-committee can come back and call for an investigation. A new committee will then be set up under section 24 and go through the detailed investigation. The problem with all of this is that responsibility is being transferred twice to sub-committees of the board. There is no doubt that is the intention, but because the Act does not specifically state it, it could be argued it is silent on it and, therefore, the board is not empowered to do some of these things. Some of these inquiries can last for some time. It will almost invariably happen that a director who is a member of one of these committees will run out of time by a couple of months. It could then be argued that the inquiry committee was not properly empowered in some way. This matter was of concern to all the members of the supervisory authority and was brought to the attention of the Minister of State. The board will be relieved this is being acted upon so quickly because there was a worry it might be held back until the main Bill was introduced. This gives certainty and allows for due process. We are now opening a new argument where smart lawyers will say another section does not state the authority can do this. In this other situation about which we are talking the Act outlines the board’s exact powers and how it can delegate authority. It could be argued, there- fore, that it cannot do the other because it is not specifically mentioned in legislation, that it will be necessary to structure everything rather agreeing the intention of the Act — that the board, like any properly functioning board, will use its own judgment to ensure it is brought forward. Section 9 of the primary legislation outlines the functions and authorities of the board, includ- ing any other powers required of it to fulfil the objectives contemplated by it. There is a catch- all provision, therefore, but our lawyers were worried that this was not strong enough and could be challenged. This will be a belt and braces approach that will give certainty to some of the investigations raised on both sides of the House related to accountants and auditors who were in the middle of decisions taken by well known banks.

699 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

[Senator Joe O’Toole.]

I welcome this and emphasise to my colleagues how necessary it is. The issue I raised has been addressed, but it will arise again and again in the future. Therefore, it is important.

Senator Feargal Quinn: The Minister of State drew attention to the benefit of the Seanad, pointing out that it had covered some areas that could have been missed. This example is a reminder. It is a Seanad Bill, but Senator O’Toole’s explanation is welcome, because it is a first-hand explanation of the work of a supervisory authority and how legalese is open to different interpretations. We have visitors today who are students participating in the Mitchell scholarship programme. I can remember the legislation to establish that programme which was brought here from the Dáil and it was noted that there was an important flaw that had not been noticed in the Dáil. An amendment was tabled, the Minister accepted it and the Bill went back to the Dáil. This is a good example of the importance of the Seanad. We should recognise that looking at all legislation a second time is valuable. Having people like Senator O’Toole in the House gives us the opportunity to avail of such expertise and amend legislation as a result. I am delighted the Minister of State has accepted the point made and I support the amendment.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: We hope this will give confidence to take on any challenges or investi- gations required and that it will be seamless in the context of person staying on until an inquiry is complete. My speaking notes pale into insignificance compared to Senator O’Toole’s explanation of the need for the amendment. The work of the company law review group on the consolidation of company law is a huge undertaking. All of the companies Acts will be incorporated in the final company law Bill. We will set a calendar date when we believe publication will take place and the Bill will be ready to go through the Houses but that has slipped because we knew this would be a huge undertaking. There are 1,200 sections in the company law legislation being considered by the review group. The amendment is necessary and we hope it will comfort those involved in inquiries who are coming to the end of their term.

Senator Joe O’Toole: The last consolidation Bill was introduced in 1991 and dealt with in the Seanad for long periods. It would be of benefit if the new consolidation Bill could be introduced in this House where it could be taken more slowly. The people most affected by the Bill will not look at it until the discussion takes place; therefore, it is vital that we do this. We did it in 1991 and it took a lot of time to get through. One chapter had to be brought through as a section on its own because of the Goodman affair and we had to come back during the summer to deal with it. It was important legislation. I completely agree with the Minister of State. On Second Stage I talked about the delay in introducing the legislation, but I also said to the Tánaiste I did not believe it would be here in the spring, even though she insisted it would be. However, I do not want this legislation to be rushed because there is too much at stake. Issues dealt with in it need to be looked at and everyone must have an input. It should be introduced in this House and the time granted to go through it because it will take weeks to do it.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 4 agreed to.

TITLE.

Government amendment No. 7: 700 Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) 26 November 2009. Bill 2009: Committee Stage

In page 3, line 12, after “1990” to insert the following: “AND THE COMPANIES (AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING) ACT 2003,”.

Amendment agreed to.

Title, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: “That the Bill do now pass.”

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Billy Kelleher): I thank Senators for their co-operation with the Bill. This is the second company law Bill initiated in the Seanad in 2009; therefore, we are fond of introducing such legislation here. This is a Chamber that can help in broadening the knowledge and input into legislation. On an issue raised by Senator O’Toole in the context of the company law review, there has already been broad consultation, because a wide ranging body of interests has been involved in feeding the input into the consolidation of that Bill. Whichever Chamber in which the Bill is initiated, it will take a long time to go through the legislative procedure. It is possible we might need a dedicated committee, at some stage, to go through the proposed legislation in detail, in addition to the two Houses. That is for another day, however, and I assure Members it is continually being worked on and updated. This Bill will form part of that legislation as well, when it is finally published. Again, I thank Senators and thank the officials, who have been working very diligently. I am grateful, too, for the co-operation of the House and the Clerk of the Seanad.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I wish to be associated with what the Minister of State has said. I know the work the officials have done on this legislation. I have argued with them over the years and seriously differed with them on many occasions, but I would never doubt their commit- ment, ability and effectiveness in this area of legislation. The Minister of State and his Depart- ment are lucky to have people of such quality. It has been a tradition in that Department through the years to dot the i’s and cross t’s. If we were subject to litigation we should still be caught out, but I want to be associated with what the Minister of State said and to thank the officials for their help in all of this.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: Unlike Senator O’Toole, this is a new area for me and I found the debate on this Bill very interesting. It was brought home to me when I was preparing for Second Stage. I came across a company that reported its annual profits under one accounting regime and then under another, all being part of the same annual report, for some reason. There was a \300 million difference in terms of the profits being reported, so this is important stuff. One point I should make to the Minister, which we made on Second Stage, is that given the number of companies seeking this exemption to be made, it should only be granted in a sparing, judicious and careful manner. At a time when across the world there is more and more consen- sus for trans-geographical common accounting standards, this appears to be a very recent acknowledgement, particularly within the United States. At such a time it is important we allow common accounting standards across all companies, regardless of where they are located, because this promotes the honest reporting of economic activity. The absence of this, as we know, has been a contributory factor to the economic difficulties all countries are now experi- encing. My impulse is to say that when this is being used I hope it will be done sparingly for the right reasons. I am sure it will, given the explanation that was given here for the Bill. 701 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion

[Senator Paschal Donohoe.]

That is a point I want to emphasise. I wish it well and look forward to seeing further devel- opments in this area in the coming 12 months.

Senator John Carty: I compliment the Minister of State for putting this legislation through the House in his usual efficient manner. I join with Senator O’Toole in complimenting the Department officials for the work they have done.

Senator Feargal Quinn: This is not a Bill that I have paid a great deal of attention to. However, as Senator Donohoe said, it is a new area for me and I was very impressed at the work put in by both the Minister of State and the officials in particular. In looking at two of the amendments, with their plethora of commas and full-stops, I had to read them half a dozen times before realising what exactly was being indicated. This is a reminder of how important is such legislation. At a time when globalisation attracts such nasty epithets, we have done well in Ireland with our ability to be able to compete. We are going to need legislation such as this to ensure that what we have is in line with what is expected by international companies. This a step in the right direction.

Question put and agreed to.

EU Council Decision: Motion. Senator John Hanafin: I move:

“That Seanad Éireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion pro- vided by Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take part in the adoption of the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Council Decision on the use of information technology for customs purposes,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Seanad Éireann on 25th November, 2009.”

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): This motion deals with the Council decision on the use of information technology for customs purposes. The customs information system, CIS, a computerised network database, which is the subject of the proposed European Council decision, is one of the tools used by customs services in the member states of the European Union to co-operate with each other in combating smuggling and customs fraud. International co-operation between customs administrations is not new. On our accession to the EEC in 1973, Ireland became party to the Naples Convention that was drawn up in 1967. That convention proved invaluable to customs administrations in what is now the EU, in deal- ing with cases involving smuggling of prohibited substances, including drugs, restricted goods, such as guns and ammunition, and dutiable goods, such as alcohol and tobacco products. Since then, the Irish Customs and Excise has been continually introducing new tools to combat smuggling, including the introduction of a scanner and the customs cutter, continually updating the legal bases for co-operation with colleagues in other member states as the need arose. A second scanner and cutter will also be operational by the end of this year. The success of this co-operation and sharing of intelligence can be demonstrated by the fact that seizures of cigarettes and roll your-own tobacco have more than doubled by value since 2007. Some 74.5 million cigarettes were seized in 2007, and 135 million in 2008. In addition, customs seized over 1,500 kg of roll-your-own tobacco in 2007 and almost 3,100 kg in 2008. 702 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion

During the period January-October 2009, over 200 million cigarettes have been seized, with a retail value of approximately \80.5 million. This includes the recent seizure on 27 October of some 120 million cigarettes at Greenore Port, which was valued at \50 million. Alcohol recovered increased from 139 seizures in 2007 to 282 in 2008. This involved the seizure of over 22,800 litres of beer, wine and spirits in 2007, and more than 83,000 litres in 2008. During the period January-October 2009, there were 319 seizures of alcohol, totalling almost 90,000 litres of beer, wine and spirits. Drug seizures in 2008 included the seizure of more than 1.6 metric tonnes of cocaine and heroin. One of the largest cocaine seizures in the history of the State, with an estimated street value of \105 million, took place in November 2008. Other large seizures during 2008 included two consignments of cannabis, valued at \18 million, in Rosslare; and 10 kg of heroin valued at \2 million. The overall street value for drugs seized in 2008 was over \152 million. During the period January-October 2009, drugs with a street value of \42 million were seized. Cash seizures in 2008, representing the proceeds of crime, amounted to \3.5 million, seven times more than customs seized in 2007. During the period January-October 2009, the net amount of cash seized amounted to \1 million. Most of the large seizures were made as a result of intelligence. This is the strongest indication of the increased effectiveness of customs’ intelligence capability and of good qualify inter-agency co-operation both in Ireland and inter- nationally. However, we cannot be complacent. There are the potential losses to the Exchequer of such activities, the effect on legitimate business, and the impact of drug abuse on our com- munities. Those engaged in smuggling activities are becoming more sophisticated in their approach and more ruthless in their determination. One of the initiatives taken at EU level to combat smuggling was the development of the customs information system. On completion of the Single Market in 1993, the European Union decided to build an information system specifically for customs, aimed at ensuring customs officers had immediate access to information on sus- picious border crossings throughout the Union. The reasons for setting up this system which are equally valid today were: the abolition of normal customs controls at internal EU frontiers on completion of the Single Market and the effect this could have on the ability of customs services to combat smuggling, including drug trafficking; the clear need to enhance existing arrangements for co-operation between the customs services in the member states and to improve the effectiveness of customs controls, especially at the external frontiers of the Union; the success of, and improvements in, technology had demonstrated the benefits of fully using the potential of such technology for the rapid dissemination of information between customs offices across the Union; and the increased sophistication of the techniques used by those involved in transnational organised crime. The aim of this EU customs information system is to enable national customs services to exchange and disseminate information on smuggling activities and requests for action. Since information can be accessed quickly and legitimate trade can be facilitated, while customs and police officers can act effectively on the basis of information from other customs services on possible illegal activities. Its purpose is to assist in preventing, investigating and prosecuting serious contraventions of customs law. The system is a computerised network comprising the central database in Brussels, with terminals in all the member states linked with the database. The CIS consists of two parts to the central database, each of which is similar in structure. They are underpinned by two separ- ate legal bases to cover both the First Pillar, dealing with the three Communities of the Euro- pean Community, the European Atomic Energy Community or EURATOM and the former 703 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion

[Deputy Martin Mansergh.] European Coal and Steel Community, ECSC, as well as the Third Pillar, dealing with police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters. The legal bases are a Community regulation dealing with First Pillar customs fraud, namely, Regulation (EC) No. 515/97, which was amended most recently in 2008 by Regulation (EC) No. 766/08, and a convention dating from 1995 which also has a number of subsequent associ- ated protocols covering Third Pillar customs related matters. In each of the databases the main categories of information collected relate to commodities, means of transport, businesses, persons and fraud trends. Direct access to data is reserved exclusively for the national auth- orities designated by each member state. Revenue has been designated as the national authority for Ireland. Within Revenue, there are 17 terminals located around the country, primarily at ports and airports, with between two and five users at each location authorised both to interrog- ate the system and input cases. The Council decision with which Members are dealing is to provide a fresh legal basis for the Third Pillar customs information system to allow the information to be used more fully. Part of the rationale for the decision is also to consolidate, update and replace the existing CIS convention, as well as a number of protocols. These are a protocol dating from March 1999 on the laundering of the proceeds of breaches of customs legislation and the inclusion of the registration number of the means of transport in the list of information which could be exchanged between member states and a protocol dating from May 2003 providing for the creation of a customs files identification database which has an intelligence focus on persons or businesses which have been or are the subject of investigations in member states in connec- tion with serious breaches of customs legislation. It is important to note, as indicated, that the system has been in operation for some years with the CIS convention and the protocols underpinning it from a legal perspective. Conse- quently, customs administrations in the member states are already allowed to exchange infor- mation using the ClS on breaches of customs legislation. A proposal was made by the French Presidency in 2008 to replace the convention and existing protocols by this new Council decision. The decision was also regarded as being necessary to adapt the existing legal basis better to the control services’ requirements and allow information on the system to be used for operational and strategic analysis as the CIS is currently only an alert system. The European Parliament has passed its opinion and the Swedish Presidency plans to have the decision adopted as an “A” point at the Council of Justice and Home Affairs Ministers on 30 November. The new Council decision, in common with the existing convention and protocols which it will replace, generally limits access to and use of data on the CIS system to certain designated authorities in the member states. It also provides that the European Union’s judicial co-oper- ation unit, Eurojust, and the European police office, Europol, will have access to the system to improve the effectiveness of these agencies in fulfilling their roles in tackling transnational organised crime and co-operating with customs services in the member states to that end. In addition, it aims to give the European Commission access to the system to carry out its technical responsibilities regarding the central system which is located on Commission premises. Further- more, it provides for national supervisory authorities to oversee the operation of the system, that is, in Ireland, the Data Protection Commissioner, whose office will fulfil the same role as it was empowered to do under the existing CIS Convention. In summary, the decision includes detailed rules on the lawfulness of the processing of per- sonal data; provisions concerning specific forms of processing, collection, storage, transmitting and making available, as well as using personal data; the rights of the data subject; measures to protect confidentiality and security of processing; judicial remedies, liability and sanctions; and the designation of national supervisory authorities to deal with data protection issues. The 704 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion data protection rules governing these exchanges of information using the CIS are set down in Community law. There are no major issues of concern for Ireland in so far as adopting the new Council decision is concerned. Throughout the process of negotiating the draft decision, the officials liaised with the Attorney General’s office, the Data Protection Commissioner’s office and other relevant Departments as the need arose. If the decision is adopted by the Council of Ministers, national legislation will be required to give it effect by 27 May 2011. In the interim, none of the new elements of the decision will apply and the use of the CIS will be subject to the rules contained in the existing CIS convention and its associated protocols. I recommend the motion to the House. While I will not read the outline of the articles of the draft Council decision, to assist Members, they are available at the end of the supplied script.

Senator Liam Twomey: All Members will welcome any measure that will improve co-oper- ation between customs services in the different jurisdictions of the European Union and reduce the quantities of illegal goods imported into Ireland. I refer, in particular, to reductions in the quantities of illegal drugs being imported by any number of organisations. On 1o’clock one level, I am surprised the Data Protection Commissioner has such a role to play in the system’s operation. One would have expected that as this deals with levels of organised crime across the European Union, enormous confidentiality issues would arise as to who can have access to the system and that the information contained within the system would be kept confidential between the law enforcement agencies across the European Union. Considering that this is a Europe-wide organisation with a number of terminals access- ible right across the European Union, the opportunity for an organised crime gang to gain access to the system is good, to say the least. As for the intended aim of the proposed decision, we should be going further. Even though there have been a number of important drug seizures in Ireland, the actual cost of drugs on the street for those who use illegal drugs is still quite low. If the cost of drugs on the street is low, it means a ready supply is available and, therefore, this problem is not being dealt with adequately. Were the supply of illegal drugs on the market to be restricted, the cost would increase because that is how demand works. There are also concerns about the free activity of Irish drug barons who live abroad and organise their businesses and affairs from other European countries. They appear to be able to do this without being concerned about how the law in either those jurisdictions or this one might affect them. A huge proportion of the activities of organised crime in Ireland is controlled by non-nationals who live in Ireland and about whom the Garda Síochána does not have the same wide knowledge as it might have were the organised crime paramilitary in nature, as was the case in recent years. In such cases the Garda had good inside knowledge of the organis- ations concerned. The Criminal Assets Bureau is very restricted. If it operated at the level of provincial towns it might have a greater impact. The gardaí know everybody involved in illegal activities in every town. They know the individuals who drive around in expensive SUVs and other cars and have extensive property but who do not seem to have any income. If CAB was beefed up it might have a greater impact on organised crime which will does more long-term damage than petty crime because organised criminals attempt to bribe gardaí, customs and judicial officials. We should hit hard on this activity. The PULSE system operated by the gardaí has been sporadically used and has not reached its full potential. There were many concerns about the system when it was introduced. It does not seem to operate in the fast and efficient way we would like. Perhaps we should discuss that issue too. 705 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion

[Senator Liam Twomey.]

I welcome this initiative. We often put business first when we deal with the European Union. A long time ago we reduced the customs checks on our borders to facilitate business. We are now dealing with the effect of reduced customs on our borders on the flow of alcohol, cigarettes and illegal drugs. EU-wide commercial and socioeconomic decisions should go hand in hand.

Senator John Hanafin: I am very pleased to see further co-operation and the integration of information technology for customs purposes. I am conscious that in Ireland, because of a convergence of events, including tax rates and currency, there is a large moral hazard on our borders leading to cross-Border smuggling. This moral hazard extends further because those who get involved in well-organised gangster-type operations have in the past laundered cash and oil and changed tags on different goods to get grants. These gangsters attempt to style themselves paramilitaries. I fear that the huge divergence created by the 30% decrease in the value of sterling means that there is a huge moral hazard that must be dealt with effectively and comprehensively to ensure the Continuity IRA or the Real IRA do not have access to funds. Not only do the Revenue Commissioners lose money and illegal goods and drugs come across the Border, there is also a paramilitary threat. This is a serious situation. Within the EU cigarette prices between countries can diverge by 500% which raises the question of smuggling and taxation. We need to watch that area. Very sophisticated operations seem to exist in the Balkan countries, the former Yugoslavia, where the level of crime is almost a subculture in many areas. That is feeding into itself. Sharing information, pooling resources and the absolute necessity of dealing with illegal drugs, given the harm they do, is most important. It is more cost effective to deal with the problem at source than with its results. I commend the methods of the Revenue Commissioners and the Customs and Excise officials who have recently made major hauls, such as the \50 million of cigarettes in County Louth. That was a great success and I hope it puts many of these gangster-style operations out of business for good. We should perhaps consider the sentences being handed down to people who handle illegal cigarettes. It is perhaps time to increase the sentences. In some cases people receive only a very low \500 fine. It is not appropriate that it should be so low in today’s world. We need to get a bit tougher in this area, even at the small end of the business such as trading cigarettes on the streets because that leads to further backstream gangster operations which are very dangerous and can involve other operations which are even more sinister than illegal cigarettes. I warmly welcome the use of information technology and further co-operation between Cus- toms and Excise services.

Senator Feargal Quinn: I am very interested in what the Minister of State told the House. Until recently I was unaware of the amount of smuggling that took place. I thought smuggled cigarettes were worth between \500 million and \750 million a year. It is clear from the figures the Minister of State has given us that it is probably a great deal more and that is only the tip of the iceberg. More interesting was the fact that in many cases people are smuggling counterfeit cigarettes, usually made in Asia and containing anything. Somebody who uses those counterfeit cigarettes or drugs is in serious danger of damaging his or her health. Cigarettes will damage one anyway but these will be even more damaging. I learned recently that a counterfeit swine flu vaccine is being sold on the Internet. I do not know how easy it will be to combat that. The steps the Minister of State has taken are very worthy but we are unlikely to be able to cover all the areas we seek to cover. It is a reminder to us that the benefits of a border-free Europe also bring disadvantages. It is less easy to check and control goods and therefore information technology is essential. I attended a recent meet- 706 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion ing about smuggled cigarettes and when I said that there was only one scanner in the country, I was corrected and told there is another coming in, which the Minister of State has confirmed. I am concerned that everybody knows about the scanners and apparently knows where they are. This is clearly a disadvantage. Maybe it is just too much information to give to gangsters and others who use this knowledge to their own benefit. Senator Twomey touched on the role of the Revenue Commissioners and those who fight organised crime. It is a reminder to us of how much we need to continue to invest in that battle to protect ourselves. I support the Minister of State’s motion. I had not realised the deadline. It is important we get this done and use all these facilities to combat this which is a threat not only to the Revenue Commissioners but to the health of the nation.

Senator Dan Boyle: This is a measure that will draw strong support because there is a need for European and international co-operation to deal with the scourge of smuggling. There is an obligation on us as a member state of the European Union to act appropriately. The Minister of State’s speech highlights some of the additional measures we are taking through the use of information technology. Those moves are also welcome. This gives us an opportunity to ask where we stand on combating smuggling. Smuggling operates on two levels, legal goods that are taken in illegally and illegal goods that should not come in at all. Various figures were given by the Minister of State on the success of Customs and Excise in intercepting goods in both categories. It is, however, readily admitted that no matter how successful a regime is in making seizures and stopping smuggling, it is a small percentage of what is out there, just the tip of the iceberg. In approving measures such as this, some indication must be given how the level of co-operation and the improvement of technology will bring about higher levels of seizures and less seepage in other smuggled goods, despite the amount of resources provided. The other area of concern is how information collected for a desired purpose is stored and prevented from being used inappropriately. The issue of data retention is an ongoing debate at European level. When it comes to issues such as the smuggling of hard drugs, there is less of a tolerance, both politically and publicly, of meeting concerns over personal rights in this area. It must, however, inform our debate on our role as a democratic country and our involve- ment in the European Union. It is a fine balance to strike that in protecting the public good we do not interfere with the individual’s rights and good. Ultimately, the Government and the EU must strike a balance to fulfil the responsibility in preventing public harm created by smuggling. On these grounds this is a necessary measure. I am confident the proper safeguards, both nationally and at EU level, are in place to ensure Customs and Excise and its European counterparts are more effective in the prevention of smuggling and we will be better served.

Senator Alex White: I am prepared to accept we will be better served by this measure from what the Minister of State explained to the House and the relatively limited information we have about it. It prompts me, however, to make a general point which will arise in the House every week following the coming into force of the Lisbon treaty. There will be a much more advanced engagement by the EU’s national parliaments in European legislation, whether decisions, directives, regulations or otherwise. We must find a way of ensuring we see a little more of the detail behind this legislation. I know people sigh when they think of the tedium of reading through material from Europe. I understand Members’ concerns in that regard but we are here to do a job. It causes me a slight amount of concern to see that we are being asked today, 26 November, to agree to a motion in respect of document which was only laid before the Houses yesterday. I am not levelling that as a criticism at the Minister — at least not for the moment — but we 707 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion

[Senator Alex White.] need to stand back and ask if we are doing justice to our job and the people we represent when we agree to a document essentially sight unseen. I have not seen the draft Council decision because I have not had the time to go to the Library to examine it in the past 24 hours. A way must be found to ensure this information gets to Members. People might say we could go and look for it. With the best will in the world, that is not the way life is because busy, practising politicians tend not to have the time to ferret out information. We need to devise a means by which we are notified more clearly and with a little more notice than 24 hours. In fairness, the Minister of State provided a summary of the draft Council decision. It is important still that we have an opportunity to examine the document itself and ensure, partic- ularly with such measures, it is taken on having read it rather than simple trust. The Government will have to introduce legislation to back up this measure. I appreciate this is not the end of the story but the beginning and that these matters will not enter into operation until legislation is passed by May 2011. What restrictions are in place in the current regime of information exchange? The Minister of State said, the Council decision is to provide a fresh legal basis for the third pillar customs information system to allow the information to be used more fully. Does the Council believe it must free up the use of this information or have different categories available on the system? That suggests to me restrictions on the use of the infor- mation are already in place. What restrictions are already in place and why is it necessary to change them? I agree with and support the involvement of the Data Protection Commissioner in this pro- cess. It is only appropriate he is involved and consulted. Past commissioners have served us well and have given opinions on particular developments. What is the current commissioner’s view on this measure and does he have any concerns about it? Article 44 provides guidance on the inclusion of data and that personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs or trade union membership cannot be included on the system. Article 25 provides for the involvement of the European data protection supervisor. Article 13 provides that data have to be corrected, rectified or erased if inaccurate or contrary to the Council decision. While we are familiar with such articles, these are appropriate in this measure. The Government and the Council must bear in mind that it is necessary to keep those protections in place and that they do not undermine it. Not including them would be entirely wrong. These protections do not take from the general thrust of the measure which is that there should be robust system of the exchange and availability of information to and by the appro- priate agencies, Revenue Commissioners and otherwise. I have no difficulty with supporting the motion with the caveats I have entered. I look forward to the introduction of the legislation.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): I thank Senators for their support of this motion. It is interesting to note that the points raised in this House differ from those raised in the Dáil when I brought this motion before it this morning. This agreement will not come into effect until May 2011, following enactment of the relevant legislation. The purpose of the motion is to allow Ireland to agree and sign the new agreement, following which legislation will be enacted. Much of the discussion rotated around the question of protection of data. We must guard against organised crime gaining access to data to which they should not have access. The authorities concerned must be extremely vigilant to ensure this does not happen. The CIS contains only data necessary to achieve its aim, namely, to assist in preventing, investigating and prosecuting serious contraventions of national laws. No items of personal 708 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion data will be included in respect of broad trends. The information in respect of persons is limited to names, including aliases, date and place of birth, nationality, sex, any particular objective and permanent physical characteristics, reason for the inclusion of data, suggested action, a warning code indicating any history of being armed, violent or escaping and registration number of the means of transport. Data can only be included on the CIS for specific purposes including citing and reporting, discreet surveillance or specific checks as set out in Article 5. For these actions, the personal data mentioned may be included only if, especially on the basis of prior illegal activities, there are real indications to suggest the individual concerned is, has been or will be involved in contravening national laws. Direct access to data on the CIS is limited to designated national authorities. These are to be customs administrations but can include other authorities competent to act to achieve the objectives. The committee responsible for the implementation and correct operation of the CIS is made up of representatives from member states who have access to and use of data on the CIS. The Data Protection Commissioner was consulted and as the national supervisory auth- ority he or she will have access to the CIS to carry out his or her role of ensuring the processing and use of data held on the CIS does not violate the rights of the persons concerned. The suggestion was made by Senator Twomey that the CAB should operate a wider range of activities in towns and villages. I believe one would need to be careful not to dilute its important function or to use it in enforcement where it is not strictly needed owing to the existence of other legislation. CAB performs an important strategic purpose and it has over- whelming public acceptance and support because it short circuits what would be otherwise cumbersome ways of catching people who are at the heart and control of gangs or operations but are not easily accessible because they are rarely, if ever, at the scene of crime. That strategic function must be protected. I agree with Senator Hanafin in regard to there being a large moral hazard on our borders. We know from experience that the wider the gap in prices, regardless of whether this is due to exchange rates or different levels of tax, the greater the incentive for smuggling. There is a relationship between smuggling and taxation. I do not believe the smuggling taking place on the Border can be reduced to dissident or paramilitary activity although it is and has been a significant element in this regard. People who devolved into this type of activity have benefited from what was in the past a more difficult law enforcement environment in the Border region. At the same time, substantial joint police-customs operations have had considerable success. While more than adequate sentences in this regard are provided for in law maximum penal- ties are not often enough applied by the courts. The penalty for cigarette smuggling on sum- mary conviction are a monetary fine not exceeding \5,000 and-or a custodial sentence not exceeding 12 months. They are the maximum penalties at District Court level. The penalty for conviction on indictment is \12,695 or treble the duty paid value, whichever is the greater, and- or a custodial sentence not exceeding five years. There have been a number of convictions and fines in respect of illegal selling, for example, more than \20,000 in fines were imposed in eight cases. While the penalties provided in the legislation are considered to be sufficient, the ulti- mate decision in terms of the penalty to be applied on conviction in each case rests with the courts. There are, as Senator Quinn pointed out — this point was also made in the other House — substantial health hazards in regard to counterfeit cigarettes in that their composition may differ from those sold legally over the counter. The scanners are highly mobile. It is not the case that they will be located in fixed locations of which everybody will be aware. They take only 30 minutes to erect at any location. 709 EU Council Decision: 26 November 2009. Motion

Question put and agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach: When is it proposed to sit again?

Senator David Norris: I wish to raise a matter of urgent importance and will not agree to the adjournment of the Seanad until this matter has been at least recorded in this House. I am speaking about the extraordinary judgment of the Supreme Court today in which The Irish Times which was vindicated in terms of the public record is being forced——

An Cathaoirleach: I have not received notice from the Senator in this regard.

Senator David Norris: I understand that but business has collapsed early——

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator will have an opportunity——

Senator David Norris: I insist on the right to state that on a point of order I object to the adjournment of the Seanad because I believe we should discuss this matter, which is vitally important. A major national newspaper, the paper of record, is being required to pay \600,000 in damages in a situation where costs usually follow the event.

An Cathaoirleach: Senator Norris is out of order.

Senator David Norris: This must not be allowed by the Supreme Court of our country.

An Cathaoirleach: Senator, please. That is totally out of order.

Senator David Norris: It is extraordinary——

An Cathaoirleach: I have asked the Acting Leader when it is proposed to sit again.

Senator David Norris: ——given that the principle that the newspaper was correct to protect its sources was upheld by the Supreme Court.

Senator John Hanafin: At 2.30 p.m. next Tuesday.

Senator David Norris: I ask the House to recognise that this is an urgent national matter that could cripple the national newspapers of our country.

An Cathaoirleach: Senator, please——

Senator David Norris: The Seanad should not adjourn. I object to its adjournment and I intend to call a vote on it.

Question put: “That the House shall adjourn until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 1 December 2009.”

The Seanad divided: Tá, 25; Níl, 16.

Tá

Boyle, Dan. Daly, Mark. Brady, Martin. Ellis, John. Butler, Larry. Glynn, Camillus. Callely, Ivor. Hanafin, John. Carroll, James. Leyden, Terry. Carty, John. MacSharry, Marc. Cassidy, Donie. Ó Domhnaill, Brian. Corrigan, Maria. Ó Murchú, Labhrás. de Búrca, Déirdre. O’Brien, Francis. 710 Guardianship 26 November 2009. Payments

Tá—continued

O’Donovan, Denis. Walsh, Jim. O’Malley, Fiona. White, Mary M. O’Sullivan, Ned. Wilson, Diarmuid. Ormonde, Ann.

Níl

Bacik, Ivana. Healy Eames, Fidelma. Burke, Paddy. Mullen, Rónán. Buttimer, Jerry. Norris, David. O’Reilly, Joe. Cannon, Ciaran. O’Toole, Joe. Coghlan, Paul. Phelan, John Paul. Cummins, Maurice. Ross, Shane. Donohoe, Paschal. Twomey, Liam. Fitzgerald, Frances.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Camillus Glynn and ; Níl, Senators Ciaran Cannon and David Norris.

Question declared carried.

Adjournment Matters.

————

Guardianship Payments. An Cathaoirleach: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: I also welcome the Minister of State. I thank the Cathaoirleach for giving me this opportunity to raise the issue of guardianship payments. I am raising it in the light of the fact that the current criteria exclude some legal guardians and others, particularly grandparents caring for and raising children, from availing of the payment. The latter’s circum- stances tend to involve parents who are undergoing drug rehabilitation and have little contact with their children. Since the criteria refer to orphaned or abandoned children, the grand- parents tend to be excluded. I have encountered a variety of cases, the likes of which the Minister for Social and Family Affairs is examining, in some of which grandparents are receiving the payment but not in others. The criteria are causing concern. Will the Minister of State outline to the House the specific criteria that must be met to receive the guardianship payment? In the light of changing demographics and family units, is the Government considering changing the criteria? The Law Reform Commission is considering the issue of guardianship and the specific matter I raise may be examined. Quite a number of my constituents have been affected and the situation is causing much distress. It is not good for the child either, as he or she feels vulnerable upon becoming aware, as children often do, that his or her family is facing financial difficulties. Grandparents apply for but do not receive this payment, despite effectively being the children’s full-time carers. I have read letters from social welfare officers who cited instances in which a child had received a present from a parent, which implies contact, in deciding that the grandparents did not meet the criteria. While the children in question are living with their grandparents, having some contact with their parents, even if they are weaning themselves off drugs, is good. It is a difficult issue, to which there are varying responses from social welfare officers around Dublin. 711 Guardianship 26 November 2009. Payments

[Senator Frances Fitzgerald.] It would be helpful, therefore, if we could bring some clarity to it. There is some discretion, which may be helpful, given that the criteria are so strict and do not quite meet the circum- stances I have outlined. However, it is the criteria stipulated in the legislation that probably need to be changed. I ask the Minister to ensure the criteria governing guardianship payments are flexible enough to ensure support reaches those for whom the benefit was intended and that people do not lose out on this essential payment owing to what I would call an inflexible bureaucratic approach to the issue. It is very much a human story where children are living with their grandparents and being looked after effectively and well but the grandparents are not receiving the financial support, even though they are the guardians. I look forward to hearing the response of the Minister of State.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Seán Haughey): I thank the Senator for raising this matter on the Adjournment and which I am taking on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin. The original orphan’s allowance scheme was set up in 1935 to support orphans where both parents were deceased. The definition of “orphan” has broadened considerably since. In 1995 it was extended to allow a claim on behalf of a child with both parents alive and known. The guardian’s payments scheme currently allows for the provision of a weekly allowance to a guardian of a child who has either been orphaned or whose parents have abandoned and failed to provide for him or her. The child must live with the claimant who must be responsible for his or her care. The payment must benefit the child. Section 2(1) of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act 2005 defines an orphan as a qualified child: (a) both of whose parents are dead, or (b) one of whose parents is dead or unknown or has abandoned and failed to provide for the child, and (c) the other parent is unknown or has abandoned and failed to provide for the child, and where that child is not residing with a parent, adoptive parent or step-parent. All claims for guardian’s payment are decided by a deciding officer appointed by the Minister under section 299 of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act 2005. Prior to decision, claims are referred to a social welfare inspector to establish if the conditions of entitlement are fulfilled. The social welfare inspector completes a report on all relevant issues, which report is referred to a deciding officer to assist with the making of a decision on the claim. Each case is decided based on individual circumstances. The previous and continuing level of contact with the child and the level of the parents’ involvement in the welfare of the child are among the factors taken into account in determining if the legislative provision relating to abandonment and failure to provide is satisfied. If so and if either parent or step-parent had worked at any time and paid PRSI for 26 weeks, the child is entitled to the contributory guardian’s payment. This may be paid in respect of a qualifying child living in the State or abroad and is not means-tested. Payment is made to the child’s guardian up to the child’s 18th birthday or 22nd birthday, if the child is in full-time education. Non-contributory guardian’s payment is a payment for eligible children not entitled to the contributory payment. The means test for the payment is based on the child’s means. Payment is made to the child’s guardian up to the child’s 18th birthday or 22nd birthday, if the child is in full-time education. The rate for guardian’s payment — contributory and non-contributory — is \176.50 per child per week.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: I welcome the fact the Minister of State has stated each case is decided based on individual circumstances. He also stated “the level of the parents’ involve- 712 County Galway 26 November 2009. School Closure ment in the welfare of the child” forms part of the criteria. Will he bring to the attention of the Minister for Social and Family Affairs that in some areas any contact with the child — as I stated, even the giving of a present to the child who, effectively, is with the grandparents on a full-time basis — is being used as a reason to declare the grandparents ineligible? It involves the interpretation of the level of the parents’ involvement and contact. I ask the Minister of State to go back to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs on the issue and ask that guide- lines be issued in this regard. While it is not nice to say, many of these children are, effectively, abandoned by their parents, but there are attempts to maintain some contact. However, the grandparent then risk losing the payment and are being put in a difficult position in trying look after the child.

Deputy Seán Haughey: I will bring the Senator’s contribution to the attention of the Minister for Social and Family Affairs with a view to having clarity brought to the issue.

County Galway School Closure. Senator Ciaran Cannon: I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, is more than familiar with this ongoing saga. He probably has an in-depth knowledge of the issues involved at this stage. Seamount College in Kinvara is one of the finest second level institutions in the country. The community of Kinvara and south Galway was traumatised almost two years ago when the announcement was made by the Sisters of Mercy that they would no longer be able to continue to provide a second level education in the facility. In April the Minister of State 2o’clock indicated that there were ongoing discussions between the Department of Edu- cation and Science and the Sisters of Mercy and the trustees of the facility to secure a lease arrangement to allow a second level education — I hope, co-educational — to continue to be provided at Seamount College until such time as a new facility could be built to serve both Kinvara and a substantial area of south Galway. At the time the Minister of State indicated that officials within the Department were awaiting further documentation from the Sisters of Mercy and the trustees which was expected soon. He also indicated that once the documentation was received, departmental officials would then have to engage with the Chief State Solicitor to commence a legal process with a view to ensuring the lease would take effect immediately after the closure of the existing school. As we edge ever closer to the point where the Sisters of Mercy will no longer be able to provide a second level education in Kinvara, the community is very anxious to have the lease in place, as it would give them a significant degree of security in knowing that the facility would remain open in Kinvara and that their children could continue to access the facility until such time as a new facility could be built. I look forward to the Minister of State’s response and hope significant progress has been made since April.

Deputy Seán Haughey: I am taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe. I thank the Senator for giving me the opportunity to outline to the House the Department’s position on the provision of a new second level school at Kinvara, County Galway, and the model the school will follow. The position is that the patrons of the school in question informed the Department some time ago that they would be closing the existing school in 2012. When trustees or a patron body decide to close a school, the Department’s main concern is to ensure the best interests of the pupils are looked after and that there will be sufficient student places in existing schools in the general area for students who would normally have enrolled in the closing school. 713 Schools Building 26 November 2009. Projects

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

In the light of increases in population in the south Galway area and the decision of the Sisters of Mercy to close Seamount College, Kinvara, on a phased basis, the Department deter- mined that a new post-primary school would be required in the south Galway area. Accord- ingly, the Commission on School Accommodation was requested to conduct a survey of school accommodation in the area to determine the location of the proposed post-primary school and identify other locations where additional school places might be required in the next five to ten years. The survey which facilitated proactive planning was based on a transparent process of consul- tation with interested parties from the area. A total of 25 submissions were received from trustees, boards of management, principals, teachers, staff and parent groups, as well as others with an interest in educational provision in south Galway. The survey also involved analysis of key factors such as demography-population, house building, Galway County Council local area plans, enrolment trends at both primary and post-primary levels and visits by members of the technical group to schools. The report’s recommendations for Kinvara are that “a co-educational post primary school for circa 800 students should be provided in the northern environs of Kinvara. This school should cater for the Kinvara catchment area including traditional areas of north Clare, Ballinderreen and Kilcolgan. It should also cater for students from Clarinbridge and Oranmore, for whom it may not be possible to make provision at St. Calasanctius secondary school, Oranmore. It is my intention that officials from the Department will consult with the relevant stake- holders regarding the issues of patronage and other practical arrangements relating to the establishment of the new school entity. When a new school has been approved a number of procedures and processes must be undertaken and these can take some time to complete. The main stages are the identification and acquisition of a suitable site, design of the building, application and granting of planning permission, invitation to seek tenders and construction. Given the budgetary constraints and the timescale involved, it will not be possible to con- struct a new post-primary school building in advance of the school referred to by the Senator. Accordingly, the existing trustees have agreed in principle to enter into a lease arrangement for the existing school building and site with my Department. The House can be assured that this is intended as an interim measure pending the delivery of the permanent school accom- modation for the new school entity. The progression of all large-scale building projects, including this project, from initial design stage through to construction will be considered in the context of the school building and modernisation programme. However, in view of the level of demand on the Department’s capital budget, it is not possible to give an indicative timeframe for the progression of the project at this time. I thank the Senator again for giving me the opportunity to outline to the Seanad the current position regarding school provision in the Kinvara area.

Senator Ciaran Cannon: I thank the Minister of State for his response. It was my understand- ing that at this point the planned provision of second level education at Kinvara is to be done through that leasing arrangement with the nuns. I hoped the response would contain a signifi- cant amount of detail on how that leasing arrangement is progressing. However, I thank the Minister for State for his response. I would like to have an opportunity, perhaps before Christmas, to get some more detail on how exactly that lease arrangement is progressing.

Schools Building Projects. Senator Jerry Buttimer: I thank the Chathaoirligh for allowing me to raise this matter. Cuirim fáilte roimh an tAire Stáit, an Teachta Seán Haughey. I am raising this issue in connection with 714 Schools Building 26 November 2009. Projects

St. Francis College in Rochestown. It concerns the success story of a school that went through lean times. The Capuchin Order made a brave decision to appoint a lay principal, and the school has made a tremendous leap forward in its quest to attract a new pupil intake. It has become a pivotal player in the provision of education in Cork. A graph from the school shows the increase in enrolments from 158 to 534 pupils in recent years. That is a measure of the success of the collaborative approach of the management, teaching and other staff, parents, pupils, past pupils, the Capuchin Order, and a great principal and vice-principal. The school comprises two sixth-year classes, two fifth-year classes, three fourth-year classes, five second- year classes and five first-year classes. That indicates how well the school has done. The school is at bursting point, however. When it comes to providing places for first-year students, it can take an allocation of 140 plus, but no more than that. There are far more applicants than places available at the school. That presents a dilemma because just up the road the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, recently opened a new primary school. There- fore the catchment feeder area for this school is the fastest growing in the Cork metropolitan area. The growth in the school population puts a strain on services being provided, not least in class sizes but also on infrastructural facilities, such as assembly areas, a games room, lockers, a library and toilet facilities. The school’s full capacity has been reached and it is housed in an old building. The school’s evaluation report noted that laboratories need to be replaced and new language labs created. The school has applied for a new building. I understand we are in a recession, but if we are serious about educational provision such building projects must be provided. Last Monday, the Minister, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, made a virtue of the Department’s capital programme in a time of recession, so this opportunity to provide a new school building for the Rochestown College campus should not be overlooked. I understand the Department has been offered a green site on which the new school could be build. The evaluation report emphasises the school has a bright future, including a collaborative approach and a positive outlook. It has enjoyed good results with a good cohort of students and a great staff team. It has taken all the right approaches, including changing its status to that of a co-ed. The school’s enrolment numbers are increasing, but does that mean it must turn students away if it reaches capacity? I hope it does not because the catchment is one of the biggest in the Cork urban area. The Department of Education and Science has a responsibility to support the school in providing quality education on a new purpose-built facility. I look forward to the Minister of State’s reply.

Deputy Seán Haughey: I am replying on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, who, unfortunately, cannot be present. I thank the Senator for raising this matter as it provides me with an opportunity to outline the current position regarding the proposed building project for St. Francis College, Rochestown, County Cork. As the Senator will be aware, all applications for large-scale capital funding are assessed in the planning and building unit of the Department. This assessment process determines the extent and type of need presenting based on the demographics of an area, proposed housing developments, condition of buildings and site capacity, leading ultimately to an appropriate accommodation solution. As part of this process, a project is assigned a band rating under published prioritisation criteria for large-scale building projects. These criteria were devised following consultation with the education partners.

715 The 26 November 2009. Adjournment

[Deputy Seán Haughey.]

St. Francis Capuchin College, Rochestown, has applied to the Department for large-scale capital funding for an extension and refurbishment project. Consistent with the process I have outlined, the school’s application has been assessed and assigned a band one rating. I am pleased to be able to inform the Senator that, in February 2009, the project was announced by the Minister for Education and Science to commence architectural planning. Currently, options are being considered for the delivery of the most appropriate and cost- effective accommodation solution to meet the school’s needs taking site conditions into account. Officials from the Department met with representatives of the school authority on Monday, 23 November 2009, to discuss the options available and will continue to work with the school to finalise this matter. Pending the delivery of the school’s building project, funding was made available to it by the Department in 2008 to purchase temporary accommodation to meet its immediate needs. I thank the Senator for giving me this opportunity to outline to the Seanad the current position regarding the school building project for the St. Francis Capuchin College, Roches- town, County Cork. I can assure him that a project for the school will be delivered when the requisite pre-architectural issues have been concluded and as funding permits.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I neglected to say in my earlier remarks that I knew the meeting took place on Monday with the departmental officials. In his reply, the Minister of State referred to “the requisite pre-architectural issues”, but when will those be concluded? When will the school be notified as to the next step in the process?

Deputy Seán Haughey: I could not give that timeframe, except to say that the discussions are continuing, as the Senator knows. We will certainly endeavour to have the matter finalised as soon as possible.

The Seanad adjourned at 2.10 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 1 December 2009.

716