Da´Il E´Ireann

Vol. 654 Wednesday, No. 2 14 May 2008

DI´OSPO´ IREACHTAI´ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

DA´ IL E´ IREANN

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

Wednesday, 14 May 2008.

Leaders’ Questions ……………………………… 303 Ceisteanna—Questions Taoiseach ………………………………… 309 Requests to move Adjournment of Da´il under Standing Order 32 ……………… 320 Order of Business ……………………………… 321 Fuel Poverty and Energy Conservation Bill 2008 — First Stage ……………… 330 Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions: Motion ………………… 330 Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) (Confirmation of Orders) Bill 2008 [Seanad]: Order for Report Stage …………………………… 331 Report and Final Stages …………………………… 331 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage (resumed) ………………… 334 Ceisteanna—Questions (resumed) Minister for Social and Family Affairs Priority Questions …………………………… 345 Other Questions …………………………… 355 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 366 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage (resumed)……………………………367 Referral to Select Committee ………………………… 398 Private Members’ Business Irish Economy: Motion (resumed) ……………………… 398 Adjournment Debate Cancer Screening Programme ………………………… 420 School Recognition …………………………… 424 Asylum Support Services …………………………… 426 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 429 DA´ IL E´ IREANN

————

De´ Ce´adaoin, 14 Bealtaine 2008. Wednesday, 14 May 2008.

————

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

————

Paidir. Prayer.

————

Leaders’ Questions. Deputy Enda Kenny: Yesterday, I raised with the Taoiseach the issue of children at risk and the numbers on waiting lists who have had no intervention whatsoever. There were no answers forthcoming from the Government. Today, I wish to raise the matter of another category of children who need specialist attention and services, namely, those who are awaiting assessment for speech and language therapy for various speech and language disorders. The Taoiseach is well aware of the complexity of this problem. I cannot overstate the importance of early intervention and delivery of service for children who are so afflicted. It is absolutely critical. If early intervention does not take place, the consequences are a lifetime of self-consciousness, speech impediment and under performance. The Government has recognised this problem because in its programme for Government it states that any child under five years of age who has been awaiting assessment for more than three months will have automatic access to a service provided through the National Treatment Purchase Fund. What happened to that commitment? In Dublin alone, 4,000 children are now waiting for speech and language therapy assessment. There is further discrimination within that because it matters where a child lives. In Dublin north, the waiting period can be as low as three months, whereas in Dublin south it can be 31 months and in Dublin west, 33 months. In many cases, children are waiting for two and a half years to be assessed. I am sure the Taoiseach appreciates the frustration and anger of parents when they recognise that their child has a problem for which attention is required. There is no point in the HSE saying “Sorry love, see you in four year’s time”. There is no cohesion, streamlining or delivery of the service. That says a lot about the constitutional republic to which the Taoiseach refers. There is no delivery of service. A child living on one side of the street in Dublin can obtain a service within three months, while a child on the other side may have to wait 31 months. This is not the way things should be. I cannot stress enough how important early intervention and delivery of service is for children with speech and language difficulties. What is wrong? Why can we not have a single, overseeing deliverer of this service rather than fragmentation, lack of cohesion and no co-ordination, resulting in a seething anger? In this city alone, 4,000 children this morning are on a waiting 303 Leaders’ 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Enda Kenny.] list for delivery of services for speech and language disorders. What will the Government do about this?

The Taoiseach: I recognise the provision of such services has been a problem for some time. One of the issues was a shortage of graduates of speech and language courses but we have doubled the number of graduates in the past number of years. Another practice that is causing difficulties, in terms of the need for more flexibility, is that such graduates must be supervised by a senior staff member for the first years immediately after qualifying. We must determine why that should be the case. We must ascertain why that particular work practice has been maintained in a way that means newly qualified graduates cannot be released to do their job more expeditiously than is currently the case. I acknowledge that there is a problem in this area. The response of the Government has been to double the number of places on speech and language therapy courses. The first graduates since that doubling of places emerged during the course of this academic year. The number of people qualifying was the first major problem that we had to address and that is being addressed currently. However, we have now found that there is an added work-practice issue that has been part of how things are done thus far. That issue must be addressed in the context of a more flexible response.

Deputy Enda Kenny: With respect, that is not good enough. The number of children on waiting lists has doubled in Dublin in the past three years. Newly qualified graduates, who are obviously very bright people, having obtained 450 and 600 points in their leaving certificate, cannot get jobs because they do not have any experience. There is no cohesion or co-ordination of service delivery. We are currently preparing the most costly form of human export. The graduates will not hang around. They will go to countries where they can get jobs. We train them — the taxpayer pays for their training — and then they find that they cannot get a job in this country once they qualify. The Taoiseach has said that he has doubled the number of graduates of speech and language therapy courses but the waiting list in Dublin has doubled in the past two years. There is no point in telling the parents of children with speech and language difficulties that we have doubled the number of qualified graduates in the field. Such parents will reply that they must wait three years to have their child assessed and to obtain services, which is not good enough. The Government is now preparing for the most costly form of professional export from this country because the graduates will not wait around. In order to save the bacon of the Minister for Transport, driving tests are now being conducted at weekends so that adequate numbers of people will pass their test by mid-June.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: That is what many of them wanted.

Deputy Enda Kenny: These services are not available, however, in the way they should be. In his capacity as Taoiseach and knowing that this problem exists, why can he not issue a direction that cross-departmental influence should be brought to bear and that there should be one umbrella organisation under the auspices of the Department of Education and Science to deal with this? All these professionals are contracted to the HSE and are working in schools whereas the children have a problem that is intellectual and educational, not medical. Many of the services are funded across a range of organisations so there is no co-ordination or cohesion and no service is being delivered. I would like to hear the Taoiseach repeat that he recognises the scale of this problem because the status of what is in the programme for Government is 304 Leaders’ 14 May 2008. Questions either just another noble aspiration, as the previous Minister for Education and Science said, or another broken promise. I cannot overstate or describe strongly enough the depth of frustration, concern, anxiety and, indeed, anger that is out there among the parents of children — 4,000 in Dublin alone, a figure that has doubled in the past three years, for whom there is no delivery of service for their children when it is clear a problem exists. I repeat that this is condemnation to a lifetime of underperformance, self-consciousness, speech impediment and underdelivery. We can stop it now if the Taoiseach provides one service deliverer, one umbrella organisation, and sees to it that the professionals, who are being trained by the taxpayer, are allowed to do the job and provide early intervention. What is the status of the programme for Government commitment that children will have automatic access under the National Treatment Purchase Fund when it is clear we are going in the opposite direction?

The Taoiseach: We have established new schools for speech and language therapy and occupational therapy in Dublin, Galway, Trinity College and Cork and a master’s degree in physiotherapy is offered in Limerick. There has been a response in terms of improving the resource and ensuring we have sufficient people. The reason for the existence of this problem is that insufficient numbers of people were coming through the system. Part of our health service reform programme includes the question of achieving more flexible working arrangements whereby newly qualified speech and language therapists can take up tasks and not be required to be supervised by senior staff, which is currently part of the work practice in the public service.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: There is a need to fill vacant posts as there are lots of vacant posts out there.

The Taoiseach: That flexibility is something that has to be achieved. I am glad to hear that Deputy Kenny supports at least some health sector reforms, such as that one. He might not be as selective and perhaps he should support them all so that we can deal with all these work practice issues. The way work practice issues are operated within the system is the reason we are not getting the outputs we would expect for the resources we are allocating. That is precisely the issue in this case as it is in other areas. We might see a change in the Opposition’s view and it might start supporting reforms rather than coming in here defending vested interests——

Deputy Richard Bruton: How about answering the question?

Deputy Paul Kehoe: What about the parents of the country?

An Ceann Comhairle: Allow the Taoiseach to continue without interruption.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: That is not the main problem; the main problem is the embargo on posts.

The Taoiseach: With regard to the number of speech and language therapists coming into the system, the basic problem, as I have outlined, that has been in existence for some time is that there were not sufficient numbers of speech and language graduates coming through the system while at the same time there was an increased demand from the public. This has been addressed and we must ensure that the work practices within the public service are such to enable those people to deal with the demand. As the Deputy said, in some parts of the country and the city, that issue is being dealt with adequately while in other parts it is not. 305 Leaders’ 14 May 2008. Questions

Deputy Richard Bruton: The Taoiseach has committed to using private sector people instead of the National Treatment Purchase Fund and he is refusing to answer the question. It is disgraceful. The Taoiseach is refusing to answer the question.

Deputy Paul Kehoe: It is a disgrace.

Deputy Richard Bruton: He is ignoring the problem and has his head in the sand.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Almost three years ago, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, announced plans to hand over sites of public hospitals for the building of super-private clinics. She argued at the time that there were two reasons for this decision. First, she said if she provided 1,000 private beds in the hospital system a similar number of public beds would be freed up. Second, she said that doing it this way would fast-track the provision of hospital beds. We are now three years into the fast-track and none of those beds has yet materialised. The Taoiseach knows there is much opposition to this strategy among medical professionals. Several medical people have expressed the same view as the Labour Party about this strategy, that it is effectively creating one hospital system for people who are well-off and a different system for the poor, for those who are not well-off. This time last year we were in the middle of the general election campaign and it is clear that a majority of the people who ended up being elected to this House were people who opposed that strategy, including some of the people on the Taoiseach’s side of the House. I remember Deputy Mary O’Rourke opposing it and I remember the Minister for Foreign Affairs opposing the private clinic in his constituency. I have a couple of questions for the Taoiseach about this plan. First, is he still proceeding with the plan? Is the Government proceeding with what has been called the co-location plan? Second, will the Taoiseach today give the House a list of the hospitals that will be built under this plan? Third, will the Taoiseach tell the House when they will be built? Fourth, will he tell the House what will be the total cost of this plan to the public purse, both in terms of the tax reliefs that are being provided to the private developers who are to build these hospitals and the loss to the public hospital system of the income which the public hospital system would have received from insured patients?

The Taoiseach: With respect, I do not have specific answers to the questions being asked by the Deputy——

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Taoiseach was Minister for Finance for the past five years.

The Taoiseach: They are more appropriate to a parliamentary question. However, I can deal with the policy issues.

Deputy Brendan Howlin: General election.

The Taoiseach: On the question of the provision of more beds in the system through the co- location method, under the traditional public service delivery system of going through the various stages of capital programme requirements, it would take between seven and ten years before all the beds could be brought on stream. The purpose is to introduce into the public service delivery system another method of delivery that we believe would be more expeditious. We believe it would be on line more than would be the case with the traditional mechanism. This is one of the reasons the Government was attracted to this particular arrangement. The second point I would make in response to the Deputy is that it continues to be character- ised as an effort to bring in a two-tier health service when the opposite is the case. The whole 306 Leaders’ 14 May 2008. Questions purpose is to, first, bring beds on stream more expeditiously than would otherwise be the case and, second, by means of the various service agreements that would be entered into, these arrangements and facilities would be available to all patients, not simply to private patients. As the Deputy will be aware, under the system currently in place there are public and private beds in public hospitals. The Minister’s reason for coming forward with this idea of co-location was that the quickest way of getting more public hospital beds into the public hospital system was to de-designate what are currently private beds in the public system and turn them into public beds. The quickest way to replace those private beds, since we have a mixed system of health care delivery in this country, was to use the private sector, co-location, method to deliver private beds on public hospital sites so that the work of the consultant staff who work on the site for all patients could be integrated. The service agreements are there to ensure those facilities are available to all patients and that is the whole purpose of the plan. Each individual hospital is coming forward with solutions in that respect to augment existing public service facilities with the co-location proposals to improve the service. The simple motivation behind this process was to free up 1,000 more beds for public patients in public hospitals and this is the reason the Government put forward this proposal. It will result in quicker delivery than the traditional public delivery method.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I have to wonder what Sea´n Lemass would have thought of that answer. He was a champion of public service and I cannot see him providing medicine for profit in the way the present Government is doing. I did not ask the Taoiseach for the rationale behind the strategy. I understand the rationale, but I do not agree with the thinking behind it. I did not ask the Taoiseach to repeat that here today. I want some facts.

The Taoiseach: If I am on notice of questions I can give the Deputy the facts.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Taoiseach was Minister for Finance for the past five or six years.

The Taoiseach: The Deputy’s questions are quite specific.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: This, presumably, crossed his desk and, in fact, he answered Da´il questions about it last year when he told the House that the total cost in terms of tax reliefs for this approach would be somewhere between \400 million and \500 million. That is what it is going to cost the taxpayer.

The Taoiseach: That is the cost delivered indirectly.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: It is going to cost the hospital system \145 million per year in lost income from insured patients. I ask the Taoiseach again, and I want him to provide answers, where will these hospitals be provided? That is not a hard question. Presumably the Taoiseach has been looking at this issue for the past couple of years. Will he give the House the list of hospitals that will be provided under this co-located proposal? We were told this would be a fast track. Will the Taoiseach give the House an estimate of the timescale for the building of these hospitals? I invite him to tell the House the cost of this proposal to the taxpayer and to the family that has health insurance. This plan of building private hospitals will end up being paid for by the taxpayer, through tax reliefs, and paid for by the ordinary families of this country, whose health insurance will be increased to pay for it. On top of that we will end up with a hospital system where one will go in one gate if one is well off and a different gate if one is not well off. 307 Leaders’ 14 May 2008. Questions

The Taoiseach: This is continual ideological blindness by Deputy Gilmore and his party to recognise that what we are trying to do here is improve the system for all patients, including public patients. That is the whole purpose of it.

Deputy Joan Burton: It is not being done.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: That is what the Taoiseach said he would do but he is not doing it.

The Taoiseach: In the same way that if we did not introduce the nursing homes tax incentive scheme——

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Never mind nursing homes. I will ask about that some other day.

The Taoiseach: Let me explain. I am trying to explain something. The public is entitled to know the context in which we are bringing forward this proposal. The Deputy was misrepresenting both the motivation and the outcome of what we are trying to achieve.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach: He is deliberately and continually misrepresenting the position.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I asked a simple straightforward question.

The Taoiseach: Had we not used the private sector mechanism to provide thousands of nursing home beds in a short space of time, relative to had we tried to build them through the traditional system, many people in this country would not now have the beds that are required. That is a fact.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Taoiseach——

An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach without interruption.

The Taoiseach: That is a fact. That is the first point. The whole purpose of bringing forward this proposal is about trying to improve the capacity for public patients by providing more beds as quickly as is possible.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Will the Taoiseach answer the question I asked?

The Taoiseach: I do not have the facts in front of me here this morning——

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Will the Taoiseach get them?

The Taoiseach: I will have them for the Deputy in half an hour. That is the answer to that aspect of the question. In terms of the detail he wants, there is no problem in getting that. The context in which Deputy Gilmore is putting the question is to suggest that this Government is interested in having a different level of treatment for different patients.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Yes.

The Taoiseach: We are not.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Government is——

The Taoiseach: Allow me to answer the question. In the same way as we did in regard to nursing home care—— 308 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: We are not asking about that.

The Taoiseach: ——we are not trying to provide differentiated treatment. The whole idea of bringing in the fair deal scheme is to give equality of treatment and equality of eligibility for people, whether public or private. That is what we are trying to achieve. It is the same with the hospital system. All we hear from people who, on the one hand, want to see capital developments in the hospital system refused, because they are blinded ideologically by the facts——

Deputies: Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach: ——is the suggestion that the only way one can build it is go the traditional route. If we are to have an improved health care system, as the OECD suggests, we need to look at different types of delivery systems and different models of delivery so that we can get outcomes for patients. That is what we are doing.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: There is no delivery.

The Taoiseach: We are getting delivery and it is far faster than under traditional systems.

Deputy Michael Ring: Try that with the HSE.

(Interruptions).

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Government has not provided any systems. It has done things its own way.

Ceisteanna — Questions.

————

Corporate Procurement Plans. 1. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if there is a corporate procurement plan in place in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3563/08]

2. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the corporate procurement procedures operating within his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4660/08]

3. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Taoiseach the procedures for corporate procurement in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15226/08]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together. There is a corporate procurement plan in place in my Department. This plan was put in place to implement the requirements of the national procurement policy framework and it reflects my Department’s commitment to effective and efficient resource allocation and service provision as prescribed by the Public Service Management Act 1997 and the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993. Procurement of goods and services by my Department is carried out under procedures set out in Department of Finance public procurement guidelines and EU procurement rules. These procedures are designed to ensure that competitive processes are in place to select the providers of goods and services which represent best value to the Department, taking account of a number of important criteria including cost and suitability for purpose. 309 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

[The Taoiseach.]

Procedures in place, which may vary according to the nature and amount of the procurement involved, include the appropriate use of processes to specify requirements; select an appropriate competitive process whether by seeking quotations, advertising, use of central purchasing facilities and centrally negotiated framework agreements or more formal tender processes; evaluation of alternatives according to pre-set criteria; agreement of contracts; and monitoring of service delivery.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Am I wrong in assuming that most Departments and State agencies seem to have been entirely independent operations in the way they purchase goods and materials to service the Departments? The Taoiseach has been in the Department of Finance for a number of years and he knows the bills that crossed his table. Would it be a good idea to have a single public buying office, under the Department of Finance, which would attract larger tenders and, therefore attract economies of scale across a vast range of materials, goods and services to be provided. For example, IT services could then be contracted out to other Departments and State agencies rather than the State entering into the famous PPARS business with the health boards where entirely separate operations took place. Surely collaborative purchasing arrangements in the interests of the taxpayer would attract very large tenders, economies of scale and greater accountability and transparency in the purchase of materials and goods and give a better return all round. Is there merit in having a single State purchasing body, operated under the Department of Finance, for all Departments — which, as the Taoiseach said, would cut out the series of independent republics which do their own thing, buy their own wares, make their own tenders, advertise their wares and so on — which should be in the interests of the taxpayer?

The Taoiseach: This is an area I will have a look at in the context of the reform of public services. It is important that procurement plans or procurement policy are not structured in such a way as to cause delay by requiring people away from the organisation to do the procuring when those in front line management positions are in a position to identify prospective suppliers. They would have built up a relationship with them because of the work they do and the type of engagement in which they are involved and would be quoted tenders far quicker than going through a centralised system. Deputy Kenny made the point that related activities, whether at local government level or elsewhere, could be grouped to allow greater streamlining of the requirements of various individual councils for certain materials, in terms of road making and so on and that be tendered for in group manner. In an effort to get better value for money it seems to me that has merit and it should be part of the agenda of reform that we are talking about undertaking as soon as the task force reports in the summer.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I thank the Taoiseach for that reply. I know from his previous experience that he sees the proposal has merit. It can be complex enough to put it into operation. Collaborative purchase agreements, known as electronic reverse auctions, are 11 o’clock available through a central database and a network of procurement officers having specialist training for procurement officers. For example, many Departments buy in legal services and tender for these. A network of panels of legal firms which have an expertise in particular areas of legal requirements would be helpful. I thank the Taoiseach for his reply in that regard. I hope he will follow it through and push this to become a reality. Hundreds of millions of euro could be saved over a period by a single public purchasing office, operated through the Department of Finance, and answerable to the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach. It would streamline the process, provide greater efficiency, cost effectiveness, transparency and accountability and, as a result, would be in the public interest. 310 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

The Taoiseach: As I indicated, effective and efficient procurement policy procedures and practices can have a significant impact on the accountability and value for money aspects of the purchase of goods and services by the State. The potential for real savings from more effective procurement policies is significant. Achieving savings is important as it frees up resources which can be redirected to the provision of services within organisations. Devel- opments internationally suggest better outcomes may be possible by moving beyond pure compliance with existing rules towards improved procurement policies and practices. While some efforts have been made in this direction, scope for further development exists. The main aim is to achieve value for money, while having regard to probity and accountability. While price is very important in determining value for money outcomes in procurement and for certain categories of purchases, in particular, it is not the only variable that needs to be considered. Value for money also encompasses non-cost factors. When making purchases of goods or services, consideration must be given to whether they are fit for the purpose for which they are intended, the goods or services are of sufficient quality and the level of service or support provided meets requirements. I accept this is an area for further consideration.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I have one question on procurement by way of public private partnership. Is the use of such partnerships being reconsidered, particularly given the comments of the Comptroller and Auditor General in drawing attention to the fact that the rates of interest being applied for PPPs are in excess of what the Government would normally pay? In circumstances in which interest rates are increasing, will the use of public private partnerships and their value for money be reconsidered?

The Taoiseach: No. The use of public private partnerships is appropriate in certain but not all circumstances. PPPs are also a good vehicle by which we can encourage private sector investment to work with public sector investment to provide much needed infrastructure. Within the system of evaluation of public private partnerships, the use of a public sector bench- mark ensures an assessment of the options is made on a value for money basis. In some cases, a PPP is not appropriate and in some cases it is appropriate. With the increase in directly funded capital programmes, one cannot assume, in the overall budgetary context, that further publicly provided moneys will be available to the same extent as they are currently available through the PPP process. Private sector input provides a greater capacity to move a number of projects forward. PPPs are working exceptionally well in the roads area, for example, in terms of hard infrastructure. As is clear from the budget figures, in overall terms the vast majority of investment is made exclusively through public Exchequer funding. Various evaluations have been made and lessons can be learned but public private partnerships are a necessary part of the overall approach. To return to Leaders’ Questions, there is no single exclusive way of doing things. A number of approaches need to be applied to try to deliver the outcomes we seek.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Given the downturn in the economy, particularly its impact on manufacturing jobs, is there scope in Departments for procurement to take place with a particular focus on Irish manufactured goods and Irish provided services? Have European Union regulations closed off the potential to adopt or employ imaginative approaches to procurement by Departments and local authorities or is a protocol in place in Departments which gears consideration in the first instance to the Irish manufacturing sector? I do not have to emphasise the importance of this sector at this time with so many jobs being lost at various locations throughout the State. Is there a policy framework in place or under consideration which can help in that regard, given that the State is a significant spender on behalf of the 311 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

[Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in.] citizenry, controls the Exchequer purse and can make a significant impact on the sale of indigenous goods and services provided by Irish workers or workers employed here? In that respect, have measures been considered in the area of tendering which would take on board Irish best practice in terms of labour laws and health and safety considerations? In terms of specific procurement projects, is the Taoiseach aware, from his former portfolio as Minister for Finance, of whether Departments have considered applying to the provision of goods and services the very highest standards of labour law and health and safety considerations? It has been a matter of considerable concern to me that large sectors — I am not sure if I said something humorous——

The Taoiseach: We are allowed to smile in the House.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: It is good to see we can elicit the odd smile. It has been suggested time and again in the health sector that meat products procured for use in hospital and other health settings are not of Irish or EU origin or meet the necessary stringent trace- ability requirements. This practice is reflected in other sectors, not least in catering. The Taoiseach must also be aware of such concerns and while I cannot evidence the practice to him, there is great concern. This is the reason I raise, in particular, the whole issue of labour law and health and safety standards and wonder what approach the Government can adopt on the back of these to help the further development of accessing goods and services here.

The Taoiseach: I do not believe it is possible to restrict access to the competitive tendering systems in place based on the location of a business. At a certain level of procurement expenditure, one is required to place a notice in the Official Journal of the European Communities and bring the tender to the attention of all competitors within the European wide system. This is good because it ensures our suppliers are competitive and recognise in which areas they have to compete with companies from other parts of Europe. The bottom line is that the Govern- ment must secure best value from taxpayers’ money. It would be great if every tender issued was taken up on a competitive basis by an Irish firm. I have received representations from people who have examined the procurement of a service provided to the health sector by a non-Irish entity and found it was not as good as the service provided by previous suppliers for many years in terms of having people on site and providing after sales services and maintenance contracts. A wider perspective was taken when the contract came up again. As I indicated, it is not simply a matter of accepting the cheapest tender as wider issues must be taken into account. Sometimes people learn the hard way, through experience, that the lowest tender does not necessarily deliver the best outcome. I have seen this in the provision of sanitary services in my home area where the lowest tender secured the contract but the delivery of the contract was full of problems and caused great inconvenience for a long time. It may well have cost the local authority more than if it had gone elsewhere, which can happen. The main thrust of the Deputy’s question was whether there was any way one could limit tenders to Irish manufacturers. It depends on the size of the contract and whether one would have to notify people outside the country. That is the criterion. The size of the contract determines what clicks into the EU Journal advertisement requirement under EU competition law. As I said, it requires people who study these tenders and make decisions on them to recognise that there are sometimes after sales issues and after-tender maintenance requirements that need to be factored in. I am always of the view that if there is very little in the difference, one 312 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions. should give it to an Irish firm, although that must be legal and appropriate. I am sure such judgments are made by people at various times. I am not aware that any problem exists in the food and catering area in terms of the meat being used, whether in the health sector or elsewhere. I have not come across people who have indicated that there is a problem there. Beef from outside the EU is eaten in this country. Local farmers and organisations have a view about that but it is part of the ebb and flow of trade and trade agreements. As happened in the past, basic standards were not met and a temporary ban was brought to bear. These issues are monitored all the time.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: I thank the Taoiseach for his reply and for indicating a willingness to look at what can be done to secure best outcomes from an Irish perspective. Will he look at Irish labour law issues in regard to the procurement of materials and services and at health and safety issues? To be more specific, there are instances of substantial concern in regard to the procurement of produce by a number of State agencies, including the HSE and our hospitals network. There is a question mark over poultry. In many cases, restaurants can tell one the farm on which poultry is produced but I warrant that is not the case with our health service and this creates great concern. There are also real concerns in the catering sector. I do not expect we will get the answers to everything here but will the Taoiseach indicate a willingness to explore these matters because it is about more than securing greater opportunity for Irish suppliers? There is a concern in terms of labour law and health and safety among people of disparate opinion with whom I have discussed these matters.

The Taoiseach: In fairness to public service procurers, people want to deal with reputable organisations and firms based on the quality of their product and the fact that they can provide it at short notice and the way those seeking the product want it. I do not believe one can place conditions in terms of what trade union is represented and so on. One is dealing with the procurement of a product which must be safe, competitively priced and meet requirements. If people meet those conditions, they are entitled to tender. People in other capacities have responsibilities to ensure matters are properly handled in terms of our employment law and so on. If one brought that into the procurement process, one would complicate it which could cause delay and additional cost by the time one sorted it out. There is a need to avoid bringing in responsibilities other than those about which we are talking, that is, getting value for money for products which are safe for people to use or for whatever purpose they are sought. There is the wider supervisory role of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment in regard to labour law matters. The labour inspectorate deals with that issue and it should not be brought into the tendering process.

Independent Members. 4. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the arrangements in place in his Department for providing assistance to certain Independent Members of Da´il E´ ireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3564/08]

5. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the arrangements in place within his Depart- ment to provide assistance to certain Independent Members of Da´il E´ ireann; the persons who benefit from this arrangement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4658/08]

6. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Taoiseach the number of staff in his Department tasked with providing special assistance to the Independent Deputies who support the Govern- ment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4983/08] 313 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 to 6, inclusive, together. These are political agreements that my predecessor entered into as Leader of the Fianna Fa´il Party with individual Independent Deputies. I have confirmed to the Deputies concerned that I intend to continue to implement those agreements. As the Deputies will be aware, such arrangements have existed for almost 11 years. The agreements are confidential but they are, as always, based on the programme for Government which incorporates the national development plan, approved Government programmes and annual Estimates for capital and current expenditure. I intend to continue the practice whereby a staff member in my office assists the Chief Whip’s office in its work in liaising with these Deputies. This official will meet with these Deputies on a regular basis and arrange to keep them briefed on issues as they arise. I confirm there is no additional cost to the taxpayer in dealing with these Deputies. The official dealing with the Deputies is an Assistant Principal and he assists the Chief Whip in this matter.

Deputy Enda Kenny: It was not a very exhaustive reply. I note the Taoiseach now refers to the previous Taoiseach as his predecessor.

The Taoiseach: A respectful reference.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I understand that. Those elected to the House will make a case for their constituencies. The agreements reached with the former Taoiseach, as leader of Fianna Fa´il, amounted to millions for Kerry and international agreements with Deputy Finian McGrath ranging from Cuba to Burma, although I am not sure as they have not been published.

Deputy Finian McGrath: It does not cover Burma.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Che McGrath.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Another Deputy said she had an arrangement with the former Taoiseach which was good for everybody but he confirmed there was no such agreement. The Taoiseach said it would not cost anything to keep the service between the Independent Members and the Government alive which is fair enough because there is a person liaising on that basis. However, does it mean that if an issue arises in the constituency of an Independent Member, such as a factory closure, it receive particular attention, a particular response or special treatment through the Government liaison person as opposed to that received by the constituency of a Government backbencher or someone else? Is that the sort of relationship that exists? Is there any special treatment for these Members because they happen to be Inde- pendent? As the Taoiseach knows, he is not dependent on them and can make up the numbers with Fianna Fa´il, the remnants of the Progressive Democrats and those Green Party men from the other side.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: The other planet.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I suppose the Taoiseach will not tell me what is in these deals, if anything. Is it a case of what Deputy Bertie Ahern said in that they are references to the programme for Government but that they apply to the individual constituencies? That is drawing a very fine line between saying they are not going to get anything very much and that there is a reference to the programme for Government. If these deals exist, do they still stand? Is there anything exceptional in them for those constituencies concerned given that the Government faces economic challenges with difficulties 314 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions. in many areas? Do these deals provide anything over and above what Government Deputies will get? Is the Taoiseach prepared to publish them? Is it not peculiar that these deals were done with the former leader of Fianna Fa´il, who happened to be the Taoiseach, and that nobody is entitled to find out about them? The Free- dom of Information Act will not provide us with any information. The Minister of State, Deputy Pat Carey, does not know what deal Deputy Finian McGrath has reached. In the old days, when Deputy Carey was a humble Deputy, I used say to him: “Bide your time, your hour will come”. Now he has a seat at the Cabinet table. However, the Minister of State does not know what deal Deputy Finian McGrath has made, if any.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I have put it on the record.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Perhaps the Taoiseach, in his new-found openness and directness will tell us the story.

The Taoiseach: The situation is very simple. The Independent Deputies who support this Government came to a political agreement with my predecessor, which I confirmed before I became Taoiseach. I thank them for their support. In fairness to the Deputies concerned, they just want to be kept informed on those areas of policy in which they have a particular interest, on which they have indicated they seek progress and on which their support is based. I will do all I can to ensure that, as with other parts of the programme for Government, I can implement that. With regard to what the arrangement would be if there was a closure of a factory in the constituency, I would hope that all Deputies representing that constituency would be dealt with equitably. They all represent the people of the area and would be dealt with by me or any Minister in the same respectful way as anybody with a genuine concern about an issue that arises. Nobody here seeks anything over and above the normal courtesies or the normal, mature political relationship one would expect from people who have made a commitment to support the Government. In the context of implementing its programme, the Government understands that many of the commitments consistent with its implementation are dealt with in an appropriate way in recognition of the arrangements.

Deputy Enda Kenny: The nearest I got to finding out what was in the south Kerry deal was the picture at the top of the page, but I understand from what Deputy Healy-Rae said that it included millions of euro. A Deputy from my constituency had some kind of arrangement as an Independent Deputy, but is no longer independent. What is the status of that arrangement? Has it been subsumed back into the normal Fianna Fa´il arrangement or treatment for party Deputies? I like the Taoiseach’s remark that if something goes wrong in a constituency, all Deputies in the constituency will be treated in the same manner.

The Taoiseach: That is in terms of their interaction with the Government. Supporters of the Government would, of course, be——

Deputy Enda Kenny: I hope the Taoiseach will apply that when it happens.

The Taoiseach: On the matter of the Independent Deputy, the Deputy can be assured Deputy Beverley Flynn will continue to give very effective representation to the people of Mayo. The one guarantee we have for the next four years is that she will deliver far more than those who are in Opposition.

Deputy Enda Kenny: We shall see about that shortly. That was not her line last year. 315 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The position is that the Taoiseach is following the practice of his predecessor and stating the agreements made with the Independent Deputies who support the Government will not be published and the status of the agreements is that they were agreements between the Fianna Faíl Party, or Fianna Faíl leader at the time, and the Independent Deputies. Has the content of the agreements made between Fianna Faíl and the Independent Deputies been made known to the other two parties in Government? Second, have the contents of the agreements been approved by Government, in so far as they involve any public expenditure or commitment to public policy? Third, is there anything in the agreements which is not in the programme for Government? Fourth, if these are political agreements between Fianna Faíl and Independent Deputies which will not be published, why are they not being serviced by an officer of Fianna Faíl and paid for by the Fianna Faíl Party rather than being serviced by a civil servant and paid for by the taxpayer?

The Taoiseach: The interaction of the Deputies is with my office and staff, who deal with all internal issues, the same as with any other Member. There is a specific contact person for those Deputies through my office, which is an arrangement of convenience for them and me in ensuring the lines of communication are open and effective. The people concerned do their general work but provide a specific contact point. There is no more in it than that, which is appropriate and sensible. The agreements, which are confidential, are based on the programme for Government. That programme incorporates the national development plan and the approved Government programmes in the annual Estimates for capital and current expenditure. No programme for Government indicates every individual agreement. It goes through the various sectors of Government activity and indicates in broad terms the direction of Government policy as agreed by the parties in Government. In terms of implementation and moving forward on issues, there is obviously interaction between the Deputies and individual Ministers. Deputies continue to make their representations and cases as would any other Deputies. Deputies in the Opposition have the same facility. The situation is there are issues that must be progressed. These issues are consistent with the programme for Government and, in that sense, are not outside the programme. I will not breach the confidentiality of the agreements, but if Deputies want to have an indication of the broad thrust of Government policy, it is available in the programme for Government. Individual decisions by Ministers in progressing those programmes and policy directions, are a matter for their discretion. Sometimes Ministers can make decisions on their own, but other decisions require Government approval. The normal procedures and evaluations are observed. The political agreements are exactly that and we must proceed on that basis.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I want to pursue the distinction between political agreements and agreements relating to public policy and expenditure. It is obvious whatever kind of political sell-out Deputy Finian McGrath did with Fianna Fa´il will not be made public unless Fianna Fa´il or Deputy McGrath makes it public.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Like Guantanamo, Cuba and all those places.

Deputy Finian McGrath: There are approximately 1,000 copies of that.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Any matter relating to public expenditure or policy is public business and should be made public. I understand what the Taoiseach has said, that the officer in his Department deals with the Independent Deputies on the basis of public policy. The matters 316 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions. about which they deal should be made public. That is not political, but public policy and expenditure. It is also clear from what the Taoiseach has said that there is nothing in the agreements which go beyond the programme for Government and that is fine. However, if one of the Independent Deputies makes a claim that he or she has agreed something with the Government, such as that there is something in the agreement which is not, as far as the Taoiseach, his people or his blind Ministers are concerned, contained in the programme for Government, or if one sends around literature in his or her constituency or makes an announcement or declaration that he or she has agreed something with Government that has not been agreed, what is the procedure by which it will be brought to the attention of the Deputy concerned that he or she is incorrect? Do the Taoiseach’s people or the liaison officer contact the Independent Deputy and inform him or her that he or she has overstepped the mark and that such was never agreed? Let us take for example Deputy Finian McGrath, since he happens to be here.

The Taoiseach: Not looking at anyone else.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Since this time last year when he signed up to his agreement, Deputy McGrath has said a number of things about his agreement and the commitments he received. Has he said anything publicly that is incorrect?

The Taoiseach: I would not think so. Obviously, he knows what is in his agreement, just as I do. I am not like Deputy Gilmore, probably because I have a different background to him, and do not keep tabs on political opponents with quite the degree of detail he does. In the old days that was a much tighter marking job than we in Fianna Fa´il would ever bother to operate.

(Interruptions).

The Taoiseach: We did not have Politburos to answer to so I do not know what degree of detail Deputy Gilmore was asked to supply to ensure he was marking his opposite number as tightly as that. We just go for the ball and let it off. I understand what Deputy Gilmore is doing. He is creating a bit of mischief trying to upset the people who support the Government and suggesting they have no deal. They have a very clearly agreed level of support for the Government based on the legitimate delivery on issues they have agreed with my predecessor and which I have confirmed I will do my utmost to deal with on their behalf in an honourable way on the basis that a deal was made. That is my very clear position. The programme for Government is not comprehensive on every issue, as Deputy Gilmore knows. If it were, it would be a very large body of work and that would not be very sensible. We adapt our position to circumstances, we understand the issues and we are mature politicians. There is liaison between us. There is contact, I am available to discuss issues of concern at any time and I will do all I can to honour the spirit and letter of the deals that have been made.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Is the Taoiseach satisfied the Independent Deputies will stay bought?

Deputy Finian McGrath: It is an agreement.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Is the Taoiseach seeking a refund?

The Taoiseach: I do not accept that. Again, Deputy Gilmore is being provocative, so much so that Deputy Finian McGrath returned to his seat. Independent Deputies are not part of the party system in the House. They had an opportunity to speak to those who sought to form a Government to ensure they could find a base by which they could give a level of consistent 317 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

[The Taoiseach.] support while dealing with some of their priorities which are not solely constituency priorities but also wider issues in which they have an interest. We hope we have been able to accommodate the basis of an agreement upon which we can go forward. If Deputy Gilmore ever gets the opportunity I am sure he will try to leverage a few benefits for Du´ n Laoghaire, if he is able to handle them.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Deputy Finian McGrath saw the light.

An Ceann Comhairle: I will allow a quick supplementary question as we are running out of time.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: I ask Deputy Finian McGrath not to leave because I would like him to hear what I have to say. No Independent Deputy worthy of the name would allow himself or herself to be whipped for voting purposes by any Government. No Independent Deputies support this Government, only former Independent Deputies, and that includes former Independent Deputy Finian McGrath, who is present in this Chamber. That is the reality and there is no point messing about or fudging the matter. Every one of those former Independent Deputies who vote consistently with Government endorse all this Government’s policies, including its decimation of the health services.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy may not use Question Time to make statements.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: He always does.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Has there been any renegotiation of the arrangements between former Independent Deputy Finian McGrath and others with this Government on the hand-over of the helm to the Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen? Have any of the elements that were allegedly agreed to by the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, been reconsidered? Given that civil servants in the Taoiseach’s and every other Department are public servants paid for by the public purse, should not every Deputy, irrespective of his or her voting position or party in this House have a right of access and hearing and be treated equally by each of them?

The Taoiseach: Thankfully we have a public service that has upheld that tradition consistently since the foundation of the State even when some were trying to subvert it, and that tradition will continue. Deputy O´ Caola´in’s party has decided to be oppositionist and that is its privilege——

Deputy CaoimhghıńO´ Caolaín: Sinn Feín votes on everything on merit.

The Taoiseach: Does it? It just happens to be opposed to the Government all the time. I suppose that is just a coincidence. I apologise, I thought Sinn Feín had a strategy but it just makes it up as it goes along. Sinn Feín made a decision to be oppositionist. Before the last election many of the party’s spokespeople said what the party would do if it got a certain number of seats, how many people it would talk to and that it would join a Government and do a lot of things. It worked out that Sinn Feín was not in the play. The party should not criticise other people who have——

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: We are not afraid of the responsibility——

The Taoiseach: I know that. Deputy O´ Caola´in should let me answer the question because I listened in silence to his long question. 318 Ceisteanna — 14 May 2008. Questions.

Deputy CaoimhghıńO´ Caolaín: The Taoiseach is using his position for posturing for his party political broadcasts on behalf of Fianna Faíl.

The Taoiseach: I am answering the question. Deputy O´ Caola´in is posturing.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: The curtain is well drawn back in front of the Taoiseach. He refuses to answer questions.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy O´ Caola´in should allow the Taoiseach to answer the question.

The Taoiseach: Is Deputy O´ Caola´in finished? I will answer the question as I see it.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: All the Taoiseach will do is take up the position of the master of mutter whom he has succeeded.

The Taoiseach: Deputy O´ Caola´in will not be called “Mr. Short Question” around here.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Will the Taoiseach give us a substantial answer?

The Taoiseach: I am giving Deputy O´ Caola´in the answer but he does not like it. He cannot shout people down because they do not agree with him. That might have worked at one time.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Deputy O´ Caola´in’s veil slipped last time.

The Taoiseach: I will answer the question when Deputy O´ Caolaín is finished shouting. Other people make other political choices. Three Deputies have made the choice that they want to support the broad thrust of Government policy on the basis of coming to an agreement to do things for their constituents. They are entitled to do that. Deputy O´ Caolaín might not agree with it but he does not have to carry on as if he is superior to anybody else. He is not superior. He has made a political choice. He talked down to the three Deputies, said they had sold out, were not proper Deputies and were wrong to support the Government. They made a choice and can live with it. Deputy O´ Caolaín must live with his choice because he does not have as many in his parliamentary party as he thought he would. It is not always onwards and upwards for his party.

Deputy Finian McGrath: On a point of order——

An Ceann Comhairle: I hope it is a point of order because we must move on.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I ask Deputy O´ Caola´in to remove the term “former Independent Deputy”.

Deputy Joan Burton: The artist formerly known as Deputy Finian McGrath.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not a point of order.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I am an Independent Deputy who made an agreement with the Government and I stick by that agreement. Many of the people attacking me today are the same people who telephoned me within 24 hours of my election dying to do a deal. Deputy Gilmore was one of the first out of the traps and Deputy Bruton was second. They should not con their people. The bottom line is I am delivering for Dublin North-Central.

(Interruptions). 319 Request to move Adjournment of 14 May 2008. Da´il under Standing Order 32

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Given the degree to which Deputy Finian McGrath has become excited by this subject now and in the past, and given last week’s appeals by Deputy Healy- Rae for assistance for pothole repairs in the Ceann Comhairle’s former constituency, I ask the Taoiseach to tell the House if there is a written agreement signed by both parties in each case and whether there is a template or specifics in each case. I do not want to know the specific detail of the agreements entered into with each individual Independent Deputy.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Durkan’s leader wants to speak.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I know. Has the Taoiseach reviewed any of these agreements in the past two or three weeks?

Deputy Enda Kenny: Every Deputy is elected by the people through the ballot box and they all have the same status when they sign the register. These deals were private deals done with the leader of Fianna Fa´il as distinct from the Taoiseach. Did the Taoiseach see them? When he assumed the high office of Taoiseach did the Secretary General come in to him gingerly with a bundle of files from the safe, like the secret of Fatima——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: On a tray.

The Taoiseach: Life is not that complicated.

Deputy Enda Kenny: ——and tell him these were the secret deals done with the leader of Fianna Fa´il and give them to him so he could peruse them carefully to see if there is anything in them that is not in public policy? If they were private deals done with the leader of Fianna Fa´il, has the Taoiseach seen them as leader of the party while he happens to be Taoiseach?

Deputy Tom Sheahan: The deals are obviously not working very well because in 12 years Croma´n pier, a new bridge for Barraduff and Kenmare hospital have not been delivered, all of which were promised as part of the deal with the Government.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call the Taoiseach. This is becoming a bit like “The Trail of the Lonesome Pine”.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: Twelve years.

The Taoiseach: These were agreements reached with the former leader of Fianna Fa´il and confirmed by the then leader elect of Fianna Fa´il. Of course I have read the documents.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Riveting stuff.

Request to move Adjournment of Daíl under Standing Order 32. An Ceann Comhairle: Iarratais chun tairiscint a dheánamh an Daíl a chur ar athlo´ faoi Bhuan-Ordu´ 32. There is a request to move the Adjournment of Daíl under Standing Order 32.

Deputy Martin Ferris: I wish to seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, the need to extend for another year the farm waste management scheme which is due to finish in December 2008 due to the fact that many of the on-farm works will not be completed in that period and the important role which the scheme has played in protecting the general environment and assisting farmers in complying with the relevant regulations. 320 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: Tar e´is breithniu´ a dhe´anamh ar an nithe ardaithe, nı´lse´ in ord faoi Bhuan-Ordu´ 32. Having considered the matter raised, it is not in order under Standing Order 32.

Order of Business. The Taoiseach: It is proposed to take No. 7a — motion re Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions; No. 13 — Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) (Confirmation of Orders) Bill 2008 [Seanad] — Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; and No. 14 — Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad] — Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 7a shall be decided without debate. Private Members’ business shall be No. 31 — motion re Irish Economy (resumed) — to conclude at 8.30 p.m. tonight, if not previously concluded.

An Ceann Comhairle: There is one proposal to be put to the House today. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 7a — motion re Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions — without debate, agreed to? Agreed. I call Deputy Kenny on the Order of Business.

Deputy Enda Kenny: The Taoiseach appointed a new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and I wish him well in his duties. His predecessor, the Mini- ster, Deputy Brian Lenihan, intended to bring in a short Bill dealing with the sale of liquor. We have not yet seen that Bill. Is that likely to be delayed in view of the fact that Deputy Ahern might have a different view than Deputy Lenihan about the scale and scope of the shortened version of the sale of alcohol Bill? The Taoiseach might like to comment on that. Yesterday I raised with the Taoiseach the question of the WTO talks. As we are all aware——

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Kenny, you cannot go into that again today. You know that.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Just a second, if I may, a Cheann Comhairle, I promise you I will not be long. These are separate matters entirely from the Lisbon treaty question. I ask the Taoiseach to confirm that at the conclusion of the world trade talks the Government, and particularly the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, at the General Affairs and Exter- nal Relations Council, will have the right of veto if he decides to use that.

The Taoiseach: We are not at that stage. While I understand the Deputy’s concerns, we are not at the stage where that issue must be addressed at all. The present position is the Com- mission is working to a mandate from the Council. As Deputy Kenny knows, the Commissioner must work to that mandate on the agricultural side in line with the Council mandate. That is the position. We may not have a deal at all.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I appreciate that.

The Taoiseach: What is wrong here——

Deputy Enda Kenny: The question is——

An Ceann Comhairle: It is not in order now.

The Taoiseach: I must say this. What is wrong here——

Deputy Enda Kenny: ——whether the Taoiseach will just confirm that he has the right of veto if he wants to use it. 321 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

The Taoiseach: Yes, we have.

Deputy Enda Kenny: That is all I want to know.

The Taoiseach: Unanimity is involved in all of this. This does not help those of us who want to get a referendum through, deal with the issue and have the referendum debate about what is in the treaty, not what is not in it.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Agreed.

The Taoiseach: If we want to do that, then we must stop this continuous speculation on another issue which may not come to pass. All it is doing is raising hares.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I am just asking does he have the right of veto at the conclusion of talks.

The Taoiseach: The Commission, upon negotiation, must come back to the Council and the Council must agree. That is the position. We know what the procedures are and let us not deal with a procedural issue which is not germane to the very important national interests which are at stake in this referendum.

Deputy Enda Kenny: But it is germane to the talks.

The Taoiseach: The talks themselves have been going on for seven years.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I dealt with it in 1996.

The Taoiseach: They may go on for some time longer.

Deputy Enda Kenny: All I want is confirmation that he has the right of veto.

The Taoiseach: What is wrong here and what is confusing the public mind is the idea that because they are coterminous they are the same matter or that they are interrelated in that respect. We have challenges in the WTO talks. We have challenges in terms of CAP issues in the treaty itself. Were we to vote “no” to the treaty, as I stated yesterday, we would very much weaken our hand in respect of a range of serious issues. In terms of the single farm payment——

Deputy Enda Kenny: I know all that. All I want the Taoiseach to confirm on the floor of the House here——

The Taoiseach: He knows that, but yet there is this confusion that these are the same matter.

Deputy Enda Kenny: ——is that these talks require unanimity. That is all I want to know.

An Ceann Comhairle: It is not in order now.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Will the Taoiseach just confirm that, as President Barroso has confirmed it——

The Taoiseach: We know what the arrangements are.

Deputy Enda Kenny: ——and as Chancellor Merkel has confirmed it?

The Taoiseach: We know. 322 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

Deputy Enda Kenny: This requires unanimity. Therefore, the Minister for Foreign Affairs is in a unique position.

The Taoiseach: We know what the arrangements are. I can confirm that these are the issues, but we are not at that point.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I know that.

The Taoiseach: There is no need for us to be talking in terms as if we were at that point because that is what people take out of it when one discusses it that way. The issue is that we have a referendum to fight. We have issues in that regard where our agricultural and other interests are greatly at stake and we must concentrate on that.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I wish to raise with the Taoiseach two matters relating to legislation. The first is to clarify a matter that arose yesterday. Yesterday I asked about the promise made by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, to introduce legislation to put a spending limit on candidates contesting the next local elections and the Taoiseach in response stated the electoral amendment Bill would be published this session. Will he clarify that my understanding is correct, that the promise made by the Minister, Deputy Gormley, to put a cap on spending by candidates in local elections will be contained in that electoral amendment Bill?

The Taoiseach: I do not know. I must get confirmation for the Deputy, one way or the other.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: On 1 April last the Government published a legislation programme for the summer session 2008. Arising from his appointment as Taoiseach and his appointment of a recycled Government, will there be any changes in that legislation programme and, if so, when will they be circulated?

The Taoiseach: I asked the new Chief Whip late last week to call a legislation committee meeting and to acquaint himself with the exact position and report to me. I understand that meeting will take place next week. He will speak to me as soon as that is over. As matters stand, we are proceeding along the lines Deputy Gilmore suggested.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Do I take it the Taoiseach is continuing with the existing legislation programme——

The Taoiseach: Yes.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: ——or will there be a new legislation programme?

The Taoiseach: Sorry, we have not changed it. I am making the point that, as the Deputy stated, now that we have a new Government in place, I have asked the new Chief Whip to acquaint himself with the issues here so that we can inform the House of the status of the existing list. Any changes to that arrangement to be made will be brought to the Deputy’s attention as soon as the Chief Whip has that meeting and reports back to me and we assess our current position.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Will a new list be circulated if there are changes?

The Taoiseach: If that is the case, certainly yes.

Deputy Phil Hogan: When will the implementation of the constituency boundaries Bill be introduced? Will it be done this session, as promised by his predecessor? 323 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

[Deputy Phil Hogan.]

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, stated outside the House that there will be a housing (miscellaneous provisions) Bill to deal with certain aspects of the present housing crisis. When will that legislation be brought forward?

The Taoiseach: I understand it is hoped that both pieces of legislation might be brought forward in this session.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: Given the Taoiseach’s own words that his wish is to see business done in a proper manner, yesterday I raised the matter of a by-law that the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources told the South-Western Regional Fisheries Board by e-mail he would introduce in 24 to 48 hours. My information is that he introduced that by-law last night, whereby the fishermen in Cromane had license and got the go ahead from the Minister to go and to fish yesterday, and got instructions last night and this morning not to go out. Is that how the Taoiseach’s wish that business be done in a proper fashion is being carried out? The Taoiseach spoke last week about community life, rural life and the family.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not in order at all.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: The implications of this for the community is what I want to highlight.

An Ceann Comhairle: There are implications of what Deputy Sheahan is doing for the House because we would never get on to anything else.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: If the Ceann Comhairle will bear with me, it is in order.

An Ceann Comhairle: What the Deputy is asking is not in order now.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: This by-law being brought in by this Minister is affecting lives and he is being misguided. To err on the side of caution, I will not name the man advising him but he has a conflict of interest in the matter. I wish the Taoiseach would look into this.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Hear, hear.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: I wish the Taoiseach would look into this because the person has a conflict of interest. He is not long out of the High Court with a similar issue. The Taoiseach should look into this by-law because it would have a severely detrimental impact on a small community.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is there a by-law being introduced?

The Taoiseach: I understand that a by-law was being introduced on the basis of scientific advice. While there is a licensing system, there is also power to postpone, defer or halt a particular activity based on the scientific advice available. It is not mutually exclusive to issue licences on the one hand, while being required on the other hand to issue a by-law based on scientific advice to do something that would affect the operation of licences. I will try to be briefed on the matter.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: They are exclusively in one area——

An Ceann Comhairle: We will move on. 324 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: It is 15 years since the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Inter-country Adoption was signed. The adoption Bill is apparently scheduled for the summer session. Can the Taoiseach be specific on when that legislation will come before this House to give effect to this 15 year old convention?

The Taoiseach: It is expected for this session. The Deputy might be able to contact the Chief Whip’s office after his meeting with the legislation committee next week.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: I would like to raise promised legislation from the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. It is well known that this is not one of the Departments that produces much legislation, so there should not be too much delay in coming up with it. I refer specifically to the heritage fund Bill, which is designed to establish a fund to assist with heritage properties, private properties and others. One of those properties will probably be Farmleigh House. I understand the Taoiseach is waiting on a decision from the Garda Sı´ocha´na on whether he should take up residence in the steward’s lodge there. I would like to welcome the Taoiseach, should he choose to become a part-time resident of my constituency.

The Taoiseach: I look forward to receiving the Deputy’s literature.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: If he has any problems at all, such as needing access to the gate at White’s Road, then he should not hesitate to contact me.

The Taoiseach: I thank Deputy Varadkar for his good wishes. It is probably the kindest thing he said about Fianna Fa´il since he started his political career. While there may not be much legislation in individual Departments, the drafting capability is often centrally located in the Office of the Attorney General or elsewhere. The fact that there is not much legislation does not mean it would be quickly produced. The Bill to which the Deputy refers is not due this year. I will have to check it and I will ask the Chief Whip to contact the Deputy.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Like everybody else, I am sure the Taoiseach saw posters this morning of three monkeys on telegraph poles purporting to call for a “No” vote in the forthcoming referendum. Another poster calling for a “No” vote contained a reproduction of the 1916 proclamation, which is an historic document. On closer inspection, these posters do not seem to be authenticated. There are no signatures on them and there is no attributable body.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not in order.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: It is in order.

An Ceann Comhairle: Not at all.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: It is in order in the context of the Electoral Acts and the Ethics in Public Office Act 1995. In view of the serious nature of such literature and the manner in which it is portrayed, is it intended to take any action to ensure that all political organisations must comply with the same regulations for authenticating documents?

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not in order.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Can I raise another issue?

An Ceann Comhairle: We will give you another go. 325 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I was feeling lonely and you came to my rescue by writing to me several times in the last week. You gently intoned that a number of questions were disallowed.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not in order on the Order of Business.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Just in case the new regime across the floors expects to proceed with impunity, this is in order. These questions have been answered repeatedly over the last 12 months. I asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he had a view on the policy for a sensitive issue such as compliance with landfills, in view of his predecessor’s statements on the matter. You replied in your letter that the Minister has no official responsibility to Da´il E´ ireann. This morning, the same Minister was on radio speaking of his concern over what was happening to landfills. Where is the Minister and why does he not answer those questions in this House? The Minister for Transport has repeatedly refused to answer questions relating to health and safety, bus stops and safe places for people to wait and use public transport. He says he has no responsibility to the House. When people were tragically killed a few years ago, his predecessor had to come into this House and answer questions on that issue. I have had enough of all this. If the Government wants to treat the Opposition with contempt, then so be it. There is a way to deal with it and the Government will know how to deal with it. I will deal with it repeatedly from now on, unless there is a change of heart.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is completely out of order.

Deputy Olivia Mitchell: The Taoiseach yesterday announced his Ministers of State and he announced a new Minister of State with responsibility for arts. For what will this new Minister of State be responsible? As he is based in the Department of Finance, will he be responsible for the budget? Will he be in charge of dispensing lottery money? There is a great deal of interest in this.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should put down a question on that matter.

Deputy Olivia Mitchell: I have a very pertinent question and I know you will be interested in the answer yourself.

An Ceann Comhairle: It does not matter whether I am interested. It is a question of whether it is in order.

Deputy Olivia Mitchell: Will it be necessary to amend the Ministers and Secretaries Act 1924 as a result of the changes to be made in the responsibilities accorded to the various Ministers of State?

The Taoiseach: There is no requirement to amend that Act to ensure the Ministers of State do an excellent job. Deputy Mansergh, who has an expertise in the arts, will work with the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism to make sure we can promote our cultural life, as I suggested yesterday.

Deputy Olivia Mitchell: Will he take over the budget?

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not in order.

Deputy Brian Cowen: The Minister deals with budgets. 326 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

Deputy Alan Shatter: The 28th Amendment to the Constitution Bill 2007 has been referred to the children’s rights committee for consideration. Is the Government still committed to a referendum on children’s rights? Is the Taoiseach aware that when making his new appointments, he has removed from the committee two Government Ministers of State who were intimately involved in it, namely Deputies Conor Lenihan and Brendan Smith? Yesterday he effectively removed Deputy Peter Power from the committee, by appointing him as Minister of State. I suggest that the Taoiseach does not regard the work of this committee as serious. Dis- cussions and hearings that have taken place in which all three Deputies have been involved have been rendered irrelevant. New Ministers of State and a new Member will have to be appointed to the committee, even though they have played no part in this com- 12 o’clock mittee. To what extent does the Taoiseach regard this committee as relevant? Does he intend there to be a children’s rights amendment to the Constitution? What progress does he expect the committee to make in circumstances in which three of the leading members from his party have been removed from it?

The Taoiseach: The premise of the Deputy’s question is patently absurd. In the unlikely event that his own party was in Government and in the event that he was preferred with appointment, he would not suggest his own Government had lost interest in the issues because he had been moved from the committee, though maybe he would. The whole purpose of setting up that committee was to see if there was a basis upon which we could proceed in an all- party manner. It has been very difficult to achieve that consensus. The Minister, Deputy Barry Andrews, has indicated his preparedness to continue to look at the issue and work with the committee. It is true that three able Deputies have been given appointments in the Govern- ment. The Deputy will be glad to know we have many Deputies of ability in this party who will take their place. Those Deputies will liaise with the former members of the committee. They will be briefed fully on the matter and are well capable of continuing with the good work of Deputy Shatter and others on the committee to see if there is a way forward.

Deputy Alan Shatter: Is the Government still committed to a children’s rights amendment if this committee can reach a consensus on the appropriate new wording to be included in the Constitution?

The Taoiseach: If it is possible to achieve a consensus on this matter, that improves the prospect of us being able to proceed in that way. How we will proceed has yet to be determined because the work is ongoing.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: What priority is the Government according to the necessity to bring forward legislation to regulate the conduct of management companies?

The Taoiseach: This is an issue that has been raised in the House on a number of occasions. I take the Deputy’s point and I will revert to him on what progress we will make and how soon it can be made. The answer I would give is similar to answers already given but I will revert to the Deputy.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: In order to be perfectly orderly, I have asked before when it is the intention of the Government to ratify the UN convention on disability. In asking that question, I must point out that in announcing Ministers of State the Taoiseach did not specify where responsibility for human rights lies. Human rights was attached to the Department of Foreign Affairs. When the Minister of State with responsibility for integration policy, Deputy Conor Lenihan, was appointed human rights was left out. Regarding the ratification of the UN 327 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

[Deputy Michael D. Higgins.] convention on disability or many other conventions, the question arises as to where the legislative accountability and responsibility lies. Human rights is not mentioned in the mandate of any of the senior Ministers, nor does it arise in the specification of any of the Ministers of State. Is it still with the Department of Foreign Affairs? Will that Department take the initiative of signature on behalf of Ireland or is responsibility lurking in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in which case I might as well give up asking about ratification of any UN conventions because it will not happen? The Taoiseach is a former Minister for Foreign Affairs and will recall the central part that the human rights emphasis had in the White Paper.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot get into that now, Deputy Higgins.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Why was it not just transferred somewhere but got lost in the cracks? No Minister of State has responsibility for this area.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot go into a big discussion on this issue.

The Taoiseach: Generally, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, will be an able proponent of the Government’s position on human rights and international agreements.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I wish him well.

The Taoiseach: I recall the former Minister of State, Liz O’Donnell, had a specific remit in that area when I was the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: The Minister of State had responsibility for overseas aid and human rights.

The Taoiseach: That is correct.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Why did the Taoiseach drop human rights?

The Taoiseach: I left it with the senior Minister. I have upgraded it.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: It was taken back.

The Taoiseach: Retained is the word.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Is it not the responsibility of the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh?

The Taoiseach: He would be well capable of discharging it.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: He has a big future.

The Taoiseach: He has a great past.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch: I wish to ask the Taoiseach about the fact that there are 350 people with intellectual disabilities——

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot discuss that.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch: It relates to the mental health (amendment) Bill. 328 Order of 14 May 2008. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should ask about that Bill because we must move on.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch: With 350 people with intellectual disabilities inappropriately placed in mental institutions, I received an assurance from the Minister for Health and Children two years ago that there would be a specific drive to appropriately place these people. Will the Taoiseach take this matter on board? Under the mental health (amendment) Bill, when will this be done and what urgency is attached to it?

The Taoiseach: The mental health (amendment) Bill is not due until next year but the question of taking people with intellectual disabilities out of inappropriate placements in mental hospitals is an issue that continues. Progress has been made and it requires the capital programme for building sheltered housing and facilities.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not in order.

The Taoiseach: That is ongoing and is not dependent on the enactment of the legislation.

Deputy David Stanton: The issue of the UN convention, raised earlier, is dependent on passing the mental capacity and guardianship Bill. Will the Taoiseach expedite that legislation because we cannot ratify the convention until it is passed? When will that happen? Will the Taoiseach bring forward proposals for Da´il reform from the Government side before the summer recess?

The Taoiseach: The mental capacity and guardianship Bill will be taken later this year. The other issue, which is ongoing, is best taken up with the Chief Whip.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: This matter has come up before but needs to be asked again. Since election to the office of the Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen has expressed an interest in streamlining Government and public sector reform. On two occasions, first by reappointing 20 Ministers of State, he indicated that his speeches are not matched by actions. Regarding legislation before us, we have the same situation. Since I raised this matter with the Taoiseach, he has expressed interest in reducing the number of agencies. Yet, 15 items of legislation are still on the legislative programme establishing new State agencies or State boards, seven of which are due by the summer recess and eight after it. On the white list of the Government legislative programme there are five Bills that will extend the powers of State agencies. Some 15 Bills set up State agencies and five Bills extend the powers for State agencies and another allows State agencies to set up sub-agencies and companies. Is this another example of the Taoiseach being a good debater but not having substance behind it? Will the Taoiseach continue to introduce legislation to establish so many more agencies?

The Taoiseach: I do not agree with the rather simplistic premise that suggests that fewer agencies per se will deliver better Government. It must be planned and done properly. For example, the HSE is an amalgamation of 56 agencies. It still has organisational challenges and has not brought harmony in terms of the delivery of services. Major challenges remain. The integration of the public service and implementing the reforms set out in the OECD report refer in some cases to functions that can be devolved to agencies for a more effective delivery of services. That has happened and there are good examples but there are also some poor examples.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: Should the Taoiseach not withdraw these Bills until he has examined the matter fully? 329 Ministerial Rota for 14 May 2008. Parliamentary Questions: Motion

The Taoiseach: I do not accept Deputy Varadkar’s simplistic contention that reducing agencies per se is the solution to the problem. In social partnership we have committed to putting the citizens at the centre and reconstructing how we deliver services on the basis of the life cycle approach set out. We are committed to doing that and must get on with the task. I will set up a task force to report to me before the end of the summer to decide how to proceed with an implementation programme arising from the OECD report and to do so in the context of social partnership, in which I believe. Regarding the number of Ministers of State, we are in Government and providing these services. We have cross-cutting responsibilities that are working well. It is an innovation of the previous Administration that works well in terms of the of the Office of the Minister for Children, how we deal with elderly people and integration.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The Office of the Minister for Children is not working well.

The Taoiseach: I have 15 Ministers and 20 Ministers of State. The Opposition, which is not in Government, has 19 Front Bench spokespersons and 24 deputy spokespersons. What are they at?

Fuel Poverty and Energy Conservation Bill 2008 — First Stage. Deputy Liz McManus: I move:

That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to require the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to publish and implement a strategy for reducing fuel poverty; to require the setting of targets for the implementation of that strategy; and to provide for connected purposes.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is the Bill opposed?

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Pat Carey): No.

Question put and agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle: Since this is a Private Members’ Bill, Second Stage must, under Stand- ing Orders, be taken in Private Members’ time.

Deputy Liz McManus: I move: “That the Bill be taken in Private Members’ time.”

Question put and agreed to.

Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions: Motion. Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Pat Carey): I move:

That, notwithstanding anything in the Resolution of the Da´il of 14th June, 2007, setting out the rota in which Questions to members of the Government are to be asked, Questions for oral answer, following those next set down to the Minister for Defence, shall be set down to Ministers in the following temporary sequence:

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

330 Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) 14 May 2008. Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages

whereupon the sequence established by the Resolution of 14th June, 2007, shall continue with Questions to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.

Question put and agreed to.

Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) (Confirmation of Orders) Bill 2008 [Seanad]: Order for Report Stage. Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): I move: “That Report Stage be taken now.”

Question put and agreed to.

Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) (Confirmation of Orders) Bill 2008 [Seanad]: Report and Final Stages. An Ceann Comhairle: There are no amendments on Report Stage. Bill received for final consideration.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): I move: “That the Bill do now pass.” This is a short Bill to address matters concerning bodies established under the Local Govern- ment Services (Corporate Bodies) Act 1971. Following the advice of the Attorney General in regard to the Health (Corporate Bodies) Act 1961 and the subsequent passing of the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2007, the Attorney General advised that the possible unconsti- tutionality of section 3 of the 1961 Act in regard to health-related bodies also extended to local government bodies established under section 3 of the 1971 Act. This arises as the 1971 Act contains similar provisions found in the 1961 Act. It is not a question of any of seven existing corporate bodies concerned having no legal basis. I assure the House that all bodies were properly constituted under the 1971 Act by way of statutory instruments. However, given the advice and recommendations from the Attorney General, the Bill before the House is required to confirm the establishment orders made for existing corporate bodies. Deputies will appreciate that given the importance of bodies established under the 1971 Act to the local authority service, it would not be appropriate to allow any doubt to exist in this matter. Enactment of the Bill is desirable to confirm the establishment orders of the seven existing bodies in primary legislation. The Bill clarifies the areas covered by the Limerick northside and southside regeneration agencies and provides for two additional appointments to the board of each agency, one a staff member of FA´ S and the other a member from the local community or local business community. The publication of this short Bill follows advice from the Attorney General to ensure there is no uncertainty attaching to the seven existing bodies established under the 1971 Act and follows the same provisions contained in the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2007, which the House agreed last December. The Bill was agreed without dissent by the Seanad and also by this House on Second and Committee Stages. No amendments were tabled in either House. Consequently, I respectfully ask the House to agree to the passing of the Bill.

Deputy Phil Hogan: I take this opportunity to congratulate Deputy Finneran on his recent appointment as Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government with special responsibility for housing. I wish him well and thank his predecessor, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, for his kindness and courtesy on all occasions and in particular, during Question Time. The Minister of State has responsibility for housing, a serious and important 331 Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) 14 May 2008. Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages

[Deputy Phil Hogan.] issue for families particularly those suffering negative equity and those on waiting lists for local authority housing. He and his Department are challenged with the responsibility of bringing forth proposals to deal with these matters. Members on this side of the House will be exhorting the Minister to do so. On the Bill, I indicated on Second Stage that there are various ways, other than through the use of ministerial orders or regulation, of bringing in orders as provided for in this legislation and in the context of primary legislation. Some Departments have already encountered difficulties in respect of backdating and validating decisions already made; they have been challenged in the courts. I have no problem with this belt and braces approach adopted by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. I welcome the establishment of the two regeneration companies in Limerick city and the boundary changes being executed through this legislation to ensure appropriate authorities are in place to deal with housing regeneration, in particular, in Moyross. I have no difficulty in allowing the legislation to proceed.

Deputy Michael Finneran: I thank Deputy Hogan for his kind remarks. Like me, Deputy Hogan has come through the local authority system. We both have an interest in the issue of local authority housing be it affordable or otherwise. I look forward to interacting with Deputy Hogan and all Members of the House on the provision of housing, an important issue for many people. Indeed, the purchase of a home is an important issue for any person or couple starting out in life.

Deputy Ciara´n Lynch: I congratulate Deputy Finneran on his appointment and welcome his kind words in respect of working co-operatively with Members of the House. This issue arose as a result of an anomaly identified in legislation last December by my party leader, Deputy Eamon Gilmore. As I understand it, the purpose of the Bill is to prevent a constitutional challenge being brought before the House in respect of the current standing of the organisations, agencies and groups covered by the Bill. When the Minister of State’s predecessor last spoke on the issue in this Chamber and in the Seanad he said that the Bill is a short document which provides that the Minister should have the authority to establish bodies to provide services to local authorities where there is a specific purpose and where it would be more practical and economical to provide the service by a single body rather than each of the 34 major authorities. There is a strong degree of logic to this. However, a concern not addressed by the previous Minister of State relates to the tabling of parliamentary questions by Members. Increasingly and, in particular, in respect of the Depart- ment of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Members receive responses to the effect that the matter raised is one for the Environmental Protection Authority or National Roads Authority. I wonder if we are creating the same difficulty by way of this legislation and whether we will hit a roadblock when we table questions in respect of the housing agencies, Dublin Transport Authority and Dockland groups. Will these agencies by accountable to the Minister not alone by means of annual report but directly? Will they be accountable to this House? Also, will they accountable to Members of the House through parliamentary questions? These are valid questions. They are issues on which the Minister of State should be clear. Will these groups and agencies be monitored in terms of costs and operations? For example, the Local Government Management Services Board established in 1999 employed 19 staff at an annual cost to the Exchequer of \1.9 million. When this was last checked, the board had 30 staff at an annual cost of more than \10 million. In 1999, the Local Computer Services Board 332 Local Government Services (Corporate Bodies) 14 May 2008. Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages employed 93 staff at an annual cost to the Exchequer of \5.8 million. When last examined in 2007, it employed 96 staff at an annual cost of \15 million. In many other agencies, staff levels and costs are increasing. However, this may not necessarily be a bad thing. What must be examined is what are the performance indicators of these rising costs. Is the public getting a return on this? I make this comment in the context of the Green Paper on local government being published and these agencies needing to incorporate themselves and blend in with the new structure for local government which will be put in place. It is also an acknowledged fact that the legislation before us is crisis driven as a result of the anomaly I pointed out earlier. It is hybrid legislation and needs to be examined. I will return to the simple point I made earlier about accountability through a parliamentary question. On a previous occasion when the Bill was discussed, Deputy Hogan spoke about primary and secondary legislation. I do not know whether this matter has been cleared up since then. The Labour Party will not oppose this Bill. All of these agencies are established to serve the public and provide a better means of local government. How does the Minister of State see these organisations working alongside and concurrently with the proposed reform of local government? How does he see these organisations and agencies being accountable to the House by means of parliamentary question?

Deputy Michael Finneran: I thank the Deputy for his questions. The basis for this Bill is the advice of the Attorney General. It is pre-emptive to stave off what happened in health. I always hope the House is the premier place where information is available to Members. This is my reading of the situation and I hope it will be the case. I cannot give exact answers to all of the Deputy’s questions on my first full day in the job. However, I am conscious of what he stated and I will refer to his concern with regard to the growth in the cost of the Local Government Management Services Board. The work of the board has expanded, in particular with regard to the promotion of the partnership process and the performance of the verification process. Half of the annual expenditure paid to local authorities is to promote the partnership process in each local authority. The growth in the volume of employment legislation, in particular with regard to health and safety, requires additional expertise to advise the local authority sector, which is a major employer with more than 35,000 people. A review is in progress on the Local Government Management Services Board and the corporate services board. Perhaps we will have information on this in the near future.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I wish the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran, all the best. He was a good Chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service and had interesting views on housing. In the context of this Bill, no doubt the Minister of State will be aware that \10 million was allocated in the 2008 budget for the initial costs of the regeneration project in Limerick. I hope Limerick will have a friend in the Minister of State, Deputy Finneran. I hope the fact that we now have a Minister and Minister of State from Limerick city augurs well for the Government’s commitment to delivering on the funding to allow the regeneration project bear fruit. The regeneration project is great for Limerick and people have high expectations driven by the Government. Mr. Brendan Kenny is doing fantastic work in Limerick as the CEO of both regeneration agencies. However, it is extremely important that if one is going on a long journey one stops along the way to refuel. It is no good providing initial money if further funding is not provided. I hope next year’s budget will put in place multi-annual funding for the regeneration project. 333 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Kieran O’Donnell.]

The Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O’Dea, and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Peter Power are both from Limerick. Irish Aid is being decentralised to Limerick and we will have full decentralisation with 127 jobs. I expect the Government to live up to its commitment for the regeneration areas in Limerick and I hope the fact we have a Minister and Minister of State in the constituency means that the commitment will be honoured.

Deputy Michael Finneran: I thank the Deputy for his contribution and for his best wishes. Limerick Northside Regeneration Agency and Limerick Southside Regeneration Agency are jointly funded by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. In 2007, they were allocated a sum of \1.13 million which was made available to the agencies for initial costs of establishment, salaries and works in the areas concerned. In 2008, the allocation to support the regeneration programme was \15 million. This will primarily cover costs incurred by the agencies and Limerick County Council on a number of fronts and will possibly include projects such as CCTV and public lighting, with a view to increasing personal security in the areas, improved levels of service in terms of estate maintenance and securing and demolishing unoccupied properties. Overall, the regeneration project will require funding from a large number of sources, such as from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for housing infrastructure, along with funding for Garda numbers, education projects and transport. We appreciate the need for continuous funding. I am giving the Deputy the information on what we have for 2008 which is that \15 million is available for the projects.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Has the Government committed to continue funding this project? It is a ten or 15 year project.

Deputy Michael Finneran: Yes, indeed. The Government is committed to it. It is a novel scheme in some ways and I know all Deputies, public representatives, community groups and gardaı´ from the area have shown their support for it. We all hope it will be a success.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I welcome the Minister of State’s commitment to long-term funding and I look forward to seeing it in a tangible and practical way throughout the regeneration areas in Limerick.

Question put and agreed to.

Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” Deputy Joanna Tuffy: I spoke briefly on this Bill last week. As I stated, the Labour Party welcomes this Bill and the establishment of the Office of the Press Ombudsman and the Press Council. I wish to raise a number of issues. I spoke briefly in the Seanad on Committee Stage and one of the amendments I proposed was subsequently adopted, which I very much welcome. In his speech the Minister referred to this, stating that following amendment in the Seanad, the Bill now provides that in situations where an apology is made and published the apology will be given the same or similar prominence as was given to the original statement. Other issues were also raised in the Seanad and I imagine we will table amendments on those issues on Committee Stage. I hope the new Minister will take some of the additional points made by the Labour Party through its amendments when we come to Committee Stage. 334 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

The former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform referred to the provision in the legislation of a new defence of “fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest” and he then mentioned the Jameel case, stating, “The court in the introduction to its judgment noted the balancing factor between this new defence with a strengthening of the law of privacy”. The first case in which the press ombudsman found in favour of the complainant related to the privacy of a Member of the Da´il. The decision vindicated the Member’s privacy. The decision was appealed to the Press Council, which upheld it. Deputy Flanagan raised the issue of the Privacy Bill 2006 remaining on the Order Paper. He supported the comments of the former Minister who said we should wait to see how the Press Council and the press ombudsman operate before a decision is made on the Bill. However, while that is also the position of the Labour Party, our former spokesperson on justice, equality and law reform in the Seanad, Kathleen O’Meara, an NUJ member and a former journalist, stated on Second Stage of this Bill in the Seanad that the Privacy Bill was fundamentally flawed and:

The reason for this is that it has not been the subject of extensive consultation or the subject of a Law Reform Commission report. It has not had the input from the industry nor from those with knowledge and experience in the area. We could not support the current privacy legislation as it is framed.

At the same time, it is wrong if the Minister’s approach will be to leave the Bill on the Order Paper in limbo with nothing happening about it. Suddenly, if he decides later to proceed with the legislation, no consultation will have taken place in the meantime. The Defamation Bill should be passed and the House should monitor how the Press Council and the press ombudsman operate but a consultation process on the privacy legislation should be commenced. Does the Law Reform Commission investigate an issue at the request of the Government or does it make a decision itself? The Minister should take steps to initiate a consultation process on the privacy legislation because it is an important issue. The Press Council and the press ombudsman will deal with many privacy issues. We tend to think of high profile cases and significant costs awards in this context but the approach under the legislation is to introduce procedures that result in courts being used and significant damages being paid as a last resort. Negotiation is provided for and it is proposed newspapers can take steps to address the public’s concerns. For example, a newspaper can print an apology, which is not necessarily an admission of liability. The most important aspect of the legislation is how the wider public will deal with the new procedures and how they will fare under them. A free press is important, as is freedom of expression, and the legislation recognises that while at the same time striking a balance on the protection of the reputation of the individual. Senator O’Meara also referred to how the wider public will fare and journalistic standards. A key element of the legislation is to ensure journalism is ethical, truthful and so on, thereby providing a balance. For example, Damien Tiernan, who is chairman of the NUJ Irish Executive Council, raised issues in the reporting of the tragedy in Clonroche involving the Flood family in a recent letter to The Irish Times. He referred to an article in the Irish Daily Mail, which, coincidentally, I had also read. What was stated as fact in the headline transpired to be mere speculation when I read through the article. Damien Tiernan picked up on this and he referred to an issue also raised by Kathleen O’Meara, as a journalist, which is the commercial pressures on journalists and editors and how that is leading to slippage in journalistic standards. He stated, “There is massive pressure on many journalists working on big stories, a pressure which comes from certain news desks demanding they have the “real” story first and that a rival doesn’t scoop them”. He also said journalists have “a duty to maintain the highest professional 335 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joanna Tuffy.] and ethical standards and strive to ensure the information he/she disseminates is fair and accurate”. This also leads to the issue of the privacy of the individual and families and how stories can cause hurt to families. Those who are hurt by stories that invade their privacy or defame the dead will not necessarily want to go to court. They would probably feel they would fare badly in an adversarial court system and, therefore, it is important the Press Council and the press ombudsman protect ordinary people. They are not high profile but sometimes an unfavourable story relating to them or their families might be published and they might seek redress in a way that is fair and sympathetic to them. In the operation of the legislation, they are the most important people for whom we must watch out. The former Minister stated the legislation does not deal with the defamation of the dead. I have not looked into how that is addressed in other countries but it also relates to privacy. A family in my constituency has an issue with information published about a family member when he died. How would the family fare under the legislation given it does not provide for the defamation of the dead? That needs to be addressed. I do not necessarily mean court cases should result but a family with an issue about coverage of a deceased relative should have the opportunity to make a complaint to the press ombudsman or the Press Council. A mechanism should be in place to address their concerns or grievances. John Horgan, a former chairman of the Labour Court, resigned from the Press Council recently. He stated in a letter the council took a decision with which he did not agree not to publish minority decisions and that is why he resigned. He felt that it would be much more positive if it did that, which is the practice in certain press councils in other countries, as well as in some other quasi-legal institutions. The issue he raised is worthy of further discussion and should be looked at down the line by the Press Council and possibly by these Houses in terms of our monitoring of the legislation. Obviously, when this legislation is passed, it is very important that we have some process of ongoing monitoring of how it is working. At the official launch of the Press Council of Ireland and the Office of the Press Ombudsman, the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, said:

There has been much comment in the media recently about the perceived ills of self regulation. Notwithstanding the independence of the Press Council and its Chairman and the eminence of the Press Ombudsman, the model of accountability we are launching here today is, by any regulatory standards, on the light side of the scale. Essentially, the Press Council will be relying on its moral authority and I do not mean in any way to slight that authority. But, be warned: there are many sceptics out there. You would do well to prove them wrong at an early date.

This is something in which I hope the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform would take an ongoing interest and that we would monitor how the Press Council operates. In respect of monitoring, one of the matters mentioned by the Minister in his speech is the fact that some newspapers and media institutions have not registered with the Press Council. If this is true, it is a worrying development. We do not want some kind of parallel operation there. The Press Council should be the primary institution. It looks like there could be a parallel operation and that some newspapers might not register and have their own system in terms of dealing with grievances brought to their attention. I worry about that kind of parallel process, which needs to be monitored.

336 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

The Labour Party opposed the privacy legislation as it stands but I reiterate that there is now an opportunity to consult with the industry and the different parties in the House about what kind of privacy legislation we might foresee down the road. Hopefully, the Law Reform Commission might look into it or some other reform. The Minister should be proactive in taking steps in that regard.

Acting Chairman (Deputy John Cregan): I call Deputy Durkan.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I was waiting to see what was going to happen.

Acting Chairman: I call on Deputy D’Arcy. The Deputy has 20 minutes.

Deputy Michael D’Arcy: Is that all? I will be sharing time with Deputies Durkan and Joe Carey. The Bill is long overdue going back to 1961 when neither my colleague, Deputy Carey, nor I were born. I am nearly sure that Deputy Durkan was born then.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I definitely was.

Deputy Michael D’Arcy: It is long overdue. We have struggled with this for far too long and we need to get it through the Oireachtas as quickly as possible. I was watching television some time ago and saw news of an enormous award in the region of over \900,000 to a gentleman from Sligo. The sum of \900,000 for somebody’s character to be defamed seems an incredible amount of money. During the debate on that award by a jury, people made a very clear association between an award of \900,000 to someone for defamation and some of the paltry awards made to people who have been assaulted in the streets, be it a civil case taken between two individuals or a criminal case. Certainly one would not get anything in the region of hundreds of thousands of euro let alone an amount that comes close to \1 million. We must have a look at this aspect. There is a constitutional right to one’s good name with which nobody could disagree. However, there has always been and should always be checks and balances in every system. The checks and balances in respect of defamation were the courts but with the award about which I have just spoken, the checks and balances have become a bit skewed. We must put in place something that is reasonable and fair. Awards of that nature seem incredible. I want to touch upon the matter raised by Deputy Tuffy in respect of journalistic standards that applied to the reportage of the tragedy that happened to the Flood family in Clonroche. I speak as a Deputy from the constituency of Wexford. While I did not know the members of the family who are now deceased, I know other members of the Flood family. The reportage can only be described as shameful. I was appalled to see what was reported in respect of that incident. Damien Tiernan’s letter went a small way in terms of professionalism towards trying to redress what happened. The reporting was disgraceful. One cannot defame somebody who is dead and this effectively gave media outlets the opportunity to do and say as they saw fit. Some mechanism must be brought in to reign in that type of irresponsible journalism. I compliment Damien Tiernan as a very responsible member of the NUJ. It was some small help to those of us from Wexford who felt so awful about the Flood family and those unfortunate events. The journalistic standards in that case were very low. Due to the fact that so many media outlets are cropping up all over the place, be they local, national or international, there seems to be much more drive to have copy. It is all about getting some version of copy. It does not have to be true but it must be vetted by the legal advisers of the media outlet as long as it does not bring them into conflict with somebody. Standards are slipping. One now has the Internet, blogs, Bebo and YouTube, as well as the old standard media outlets and local and national 337 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Michael D’Arcy.] newspapers. There is now also Sky Ireland and so many other media outlets. They must get copy. As we saw yesterday from our visit to TV3, it takes something like one hour to produce one minute of television, which is an incredible amount of work and cost. It puts incredible pressure on media outlets to get coverage and their space filled, regardless of whether it is airtime, viewing time or copy. Each profession now seems to have a newspaper and a number of magazines. It is absolutely incredible. Checks and balances lie in the courts but they have become skewed. I agree with Deputy Tuffy about privacy legislation. While there were concerns about what was going to come forward, we need to bring something forward. We cannot just kick it to touch and leave it out there because the privacy legislation is also another check in respect of the defamation of individuals by media outlets. The French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, and his new wife, Carla Bruni, sued for privacy while they were in the UK. The legislation seems to be in place in other jurisdictions in respect of the Privacy Bill. We do not always have to reinvent the wheel. If legislation is enacted in other jurisdictions and is working well, we should take the opportunity to mimic it, introduce it here and ensure we have further checks and balances on the question of defamation, so that people do not always have to go to court to seek redress. The area of what I call celebrity journalism is also important in the context of this Bill. This type of journalism is resulting in the proliferation of media outlets. Most of this so-called journalism consists of a photograph with a caption and very often the captions can do more damage than lengthy articles. Celebrity journalism does not provide us with news. It is not serving the public interest in any way, although there seems to be an appetite among the public for this type of journalism or copy. The point remains, however, that if someone wishes to seek redress, he or she should not have to go to court to obtain it. The defence of a fair and reasonable comment on a matter of public interest is being created in this Bill. I am always somewhat cagey about the term “public interest”. I recently read a book about Mr. Barack Obama. When Mr. Obama was running for the Illinois State Legislature several media outlets successfully sued to ensure that the divorce proceedings of his opponent could be opened up to public scrutiny. The media outlets argued that the information was a matter of public interest but that is questionable. While there will always be matters of public interest, the courts will determine the extent to which such a defence can be considered. In that context, the notion of the legal accordion might apply. The interpretation of the courts could be very wide or extremely narrow. Incredibly, the same thing happened when Mr. Obama ran for the United States Senate. His opponent was a divorcee and another media outlet successfully sued, in the public interest, to open up the divorce proceedings file. Given the Obama examples, the concept of the “public interest” is one about which I am concerned. We do not know how the courts will interpret the defence of a matter of public interest. I would be very cagey about this area. Indeed, I have heard the Acting Chairman, Deputy Cregan, express concern regarding these matters previously. When we create a defence of a matter of public interest, we must be very careful. I wish to sound a note of caution here because we could be creating something that will become a Frankenstein in time. Unless we get very clear, tight details on the matter, I would be very slow to enact that particular provision. There are many other issues that are relevant to this debate but my colleague, Deputy Joe Carey, is anxious to make a contribution before time runs out. I am sure I will have other opportunities to discuss the issues further.

Deputy Joe Carey: I welcome the introduction of this legislation. The Defamation Bill was published on 4 July 2006 and had a relatively speedy passage through the Seanad. It updates the Defamation Act 1961, which was drafted in a different era. We are now living in a totally 338 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) different world, with an enormous array of new media outlets, including mobile telephones and the Internet. In the 1960s there was a very limited number of media outlets. It is important that we strike the right balance between providing for responsible journalism and protecting people’s good name. The Defamation Bill provides Da´il E´ ireann with an opportunity to govern the area properly. I agree with Deputy D’Arcy that the privacy Bill should be introduced as soon as possible. Having listened to the contributions of other Deputies, there appears to be a consensus that the privacy Bill must be introduced as a matter of urgency if we are to arrive at the correct balance between freedom of the press and ensuring responsible journalism. The Bill provides for a defence of honest opinion to replace a defence of fair comment. The language in section 18(2)(a) is very convoluted and should be refined. The issue of a defence of fair and reasonable comment is currently before the courts, having originated in the UK jurisdiction in the Reynolds v. The Sunday Times case. This defence allows for 1 o’clock enormous latitude in publication of material and must be balanced by the proposed privacy Bill. The defence of fair and reasonable comment is a new theme in this Bill and is introduced on the basis of UK legislation. Should we wait until this matter is settled in court or legislate now in advance of the court decision? Section 38 deals with the survival of a cause of action for defamation on the death of the person concerned. Deputy Tuffy referred to the difficulties in this area, particularly when someone is defamed after his or her death. The taking of a person’s good name in such circumstances is malicious. We should include more provisions in this Bill to deal with this area. I note with disappointment the resignation of Mr. John Horgan from the Press Council. Mr. Horgan lives approximately half a mile from me in Clarecastle, County Clare. He is a well respected person and it is regrettable that he would step down, particularly on a point of this nature. There must be a balance between reporting of the majority and the minority decisions. The fact that this person stepped down raises questions and it is regrettable. I believe it went unpublished in media circles and this also raises questions. I welcome the Bill and I look forward to a frank and open debate. The legislation on privacy should also be introduced as it enjoys a consensus. This matter should be brought to a head as soon as possible. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s views.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to speak on Second Stage of the Defamation Bill 2006. This Bill has modern, updated provisions. This is my first opportunity to congratulate the Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen, on his election. It is a great honour for him, his family and the people of County Offaly. I wish him well in the future. I also congratulate the new members of the Cabinet and the new Ministers of State, particularly the Minister of State, Deputy Ma´ire Hoctor, who is present. I wish them all well in their jobs as they will have a difficult task over the next couple of years. I wish them well for the future. The main purpose of the Defamation Bill is to revise in part the law of defamation and to replace the Defamation Act 1961 with modern, updated provisions, taking into account the jurisprudence of the courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The key phrase is “human rights”. We are talking about respect for our people, respect for our citizens and a level of truth and justice when dealing with this issue. Other Deputies referred to the issue of privacy. We must ensure respect for persons, particularly those in public life. They are entitled to a private as well as a public life. I agree that the media may investigate public and political activities of politicians but there is no excuse for journalists to be camped outside the homes of ill TDs. It is unacceptable and a disgrace. I refer 339 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Finian McGrath.] to recent incidents of this behaviour when a Member of the House returned home from hospital and the media were camped at his door and tried to doorstep him. That is not acceptable behaviour. Those working in the media should respect the rights of these people. Section 3 of the Bill provides that the legislation should only apply to a cause of action which accrues after it comes into operation. It also proposes that it shall not affect the operation of the general law in force immediately before commencement of the Act. Section 5 collectively describes the tort of libel and the tort of slander as the tort of defamation and defines the essential ingredients of defamation. It also provides that the tort of defamation is actionable without proof of special damage. Section 7 provides a mechanism whereby both the plaintiff and the defendant are obliged to verify the particulars of any pleading containing assertions, allegations of fact or further information within a specific timeframe, which may be extended at the discretion of the court. The contents of the verifying affidavit could also form the subject matter for cross-examination of both plaintiff and defendant to which they must make themselves available at the time of the trial. Section 9 is very important as it seeks to clarify the existing law. It provides that a member of a class of persons shall have a cause of action if, by reason of the number of persons who are members of that class or by virtue of the circumstances in which the statement is published, the statement could reasonably be understood to refer to the member concerned. This is an important provision when applied to our ethnic minorities and people who have a right to have their privileges and rights protected. I refer to the often negative labelling of whole communities by the media. For instance it could be a community living in a disadvantaged area, members of the Travelling community or members of ethnic minority communities. They are often labelled because one person does something wrong and that is unacceptable. In my previous life as a teacher working in a disadvantaged community, I noted that a negative image of the community was created by certain sections while the majority of people in these communities got up in the morning, went to school, did their homework, got their diaries signed and got on with their lives. Yet reading some of the articles written about some of those communities, one would think all these people were sub-human. That is not acceptable. Section 11 provides that a body corporate may bring a defamation action whether it has incurred or is likely to incur financial loss as a result of the publication of the alleged defamatory statement. A corporate body can be a group such as the HSE. I regularly hear Members of this House remarking that we have problems in the health service and we are trying to resolve them. I hear a labelling of everybody in the HSE. I had a positive experience during this week when the HSE — Deputy Durkan will like to hear this — granted me \2.5 million extra for Dublin North-Central for a group of families dealing with those with an intellectual disability. That is something one will not read about in the newspapers. I also had the experience——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I hope it was not specifically for the Deputy’s use.

Deputy Finian McGrath: ——of people in the HSE doing a very good job. I am making the point that this idea of defamation of a corporate body is unacceptable. I regularly talk to HSE staff members and their morale is low because of much of the negative criticism voiced by Members of this House. I agree we should work to resolve the issues but we should not label people or corporate bodies.

Deputy Michael D’Arcy: Much of the criticism is valid. 340 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Finian McGrath: The same applies to businesses or factories. Business is often ham- mered, especially shopkeepers and other service providers or trade unions which are trying to do their best. That is unacceptable. Section 14 restates the existing law relating to the defence of justification which is now renamed the defence of truth. This is an important provision because the truth is being distorted in many publications and in new fast-track media situations. All Members of the Oireachtas should make the defence of truth a priority. As elected representatives we have an obligation to serve the public. This is the reason I welcome the Taoiseach’s recent statements about public service. The majority of politicians are in public life for the right reasons. They have no vested interest. The few people who have damaged the reputation of politics have damaged us all and damaged the integrity of politics. Members from all sides of the House come in to do their best. Section 19 sets out the criteria to be considered by a court when distinguishing between facts and opinion contained in a statement in defamation proceedings. Section 20 is important and should be closely studied. It provides for a person who has published an allegedly defamatory statement to make an offer of amends. The offer shall not be made after a defence in the defamation action has been lodged. This section updates the existing defence of unintentional defamation which is at present provided for in section 21 of the Defamation Act 1961. Many people have suffered in this area. An individual distributes leaflets at the gates of Leinster House which make wild and crazy allegations about me. I have not sued the man. I got legal advice and could have sued him. I will not go down that road because of the particular situation. I spent three years fighting that case here. I did my best, I even set up a meeting with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Distributing leaflets at the gates of Leinster House is not acceptable and I will not tolerate it in any situation. I will use the privilege of the House to highlight this issue. I am aware that other colleagues have suffered from this type of disgraceful carry-on by some members of the broader community. It is not acceptable. Section 22 provides that an offer of apology by a defendant to a plaintiff is not to be construed as an admission of liability. This is an important issue. I always advocate that if somebody does something wrong, whether in politics by a Taoiseach, a Minister or a TD, one makes an apology, moves on and deals with the issue. That would save much hassle, a great deal of money and many legal cases. One sees some high profile celebrities going down that route in respect of domestic issues. It is absolutely crazy. Many legal cases could be resolved if people had the cop-on to apologise if and when they make mistakes. Section 24 introduces a new defamation defence into Irish law, the defence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public importance. It is essentially designed to facilitate public discussion where there is a benefit and an interest in such a discussion. The defence is subject to the criteria of fairness and reasonableness and a range of matters, which are non-exhaustive, are specified which a court shall take into account in determining whether the publication of a statement is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The defence is forfeited where the defendant believed the statement to be untrue, was actuated by bad faith, made out of spite or ill-will or other improper motive or that the statement bore no relation to the purpose of the defence and the manner and extent of the publication exceeded what was reasonably sufficient in all the circumstances. Section 24 is important when it comes to matters of public importance. I use this opportunity to ask that in the debate on the Lisbon treaty, we deal with facts. I appeal to those on the “Yes” side particularly, who appear to be set on a course of vilifying those——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: That is a disgrace. The Deputy should speak for himself instead of running around the countryside——

341 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Finian McGrath: ——on the “No” side on a regular basis and making mad, crazy allegations in regard to the debate.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Who are the three monkeys?

Deputy Finian McGrath: I will not name them.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: The Deputy should name them given that he went down that road.

Deputy Finian McGrath: Let us have a proper, measured debate. Let us look at the details of the treaty and examine them. Let us not dismiss people who have genuine concerns in a negative way, which is happening at present. The problem is that this is provoking a reaction among the public that is not doing politicians any good. I mention this in regard to section 24.

Deputy Michael D’Arcy: Fianna Fa´il is doing that.

Deputy Finian McGrath: People have genuine concerns about it. They are entitled to ask questions and they are entitled to be treated with respect.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: They are not entitled to tell lies.

Deputy Finian McGrath: The use of phrases such as “acts of lunacy”, “head bangers” and so on is not acceptable in any debate.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: What about the three monkeys? What about the disrespect for the 1916 Proclamation——

Deputy Finian McGrath: What does the Deputy mean by disrespect for the 1916 Procla- mation? Anybody who has read——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: ——while suggesting that something untoward will happen?

Acting Chairman: Deputy McGrath, on the legislation, please.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I will move on with the legislation. I apologise for the heckling from Deputy Durkan.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: There is no apology.

Acting Chairman: Deputy McGrath, without interruption, please.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I am dealing with section 24 which is about fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public importance. Deputy Durkan should realise that when people consider that a particular treaty undermines the Constitution, erodes our sovereignty and diminishes our influence——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: They should state their grounds.

Deputy Finian McGrath: ——he should read the 1916 Proclamation. I can quote the articles any time in a broader forum and I have done it in many debates so far.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: The Deputy can quote it any time he likes.

Deputy Finian McGrath: May I return to the debate? 342 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

Acting Chairman: Yes, please, on the Bill.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I raised that issue in the context of section 24.

Deputy Michael D’Arcy: That is not the point. Rubbish.

Deputy Finian McGrath: That is the level of debate Deputy D’Arcy has to deal with. It is not acceptable. I accept that the truth often hurts.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I would not go there if I was the Deputy.

Deputy Finian McGrath: Section 26 provides a new remedy for defamation to be known as a declaratory order. It is intended to provide an expeditious avenue of redress where damages are not being sought. This is a sensible and important provision. Section 35 creates a new offence of publication of gravely harmful statements. Perhaps that is relevant to Deputy Durkan’s poster about the monkeys.

Acting Chairman: On the Bill, please.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: The Deputy should put his signature behind one of the monkeys and we will accept it.

Acting Chairman: Deputy McGrath is provoking interruption. I ask him to return to the Bill.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I am being heckled by Deputy Durkan and it is very difficult. I have to deal with Deputy Durkan every day of my life. His leader heckled me this morning. As I said before I was rudely interrupted, section 35 creates a new offence of publication of gravely harmful statements. This applies where a person publishes a false statement causing grave injury to the reputation of the person and intended to cause that grave injury. This is an important provision. Many TDs, Senators and Ministers have suffered following the publication of gravely harmful statements. It is important that we take a strong line on section 35. I emphasise that we deal with the facts, truth and justice. Section 38 provides that a cause of action in defamation should survive the death of the person in respect of whom the defamatory statement was made. It also provides that a cause of action in defamation should survive the death of the defamer. Section 40 provides that, notwithstanding current jurisdiction limits, all defamation cases where the amount of the claim does not exceed \50,000 may be taken in the Circuit Court. We need to look at the issue of claims and the amount of money being given to some people. I disagree with some of the claims and some of the judgments handed down. In respect of some other claims the judges have not awarded a sufficient amount. Some balance is required in respect of this provision. Section 40 is relevant in the broader debate. Section 43 deals with the press council. I congratulate my colleague, Deputy Tony Gregory, on winning his recent case in the press council in respect of a number of media outlets. Section 43 provides that the Minister shall, on application to him and having satisfied himself that the applicant materially complies with the minimum requirements prescribed in Schedule 2, make an order recognising the applicant as the press council. Only one such press council may be granted recognition at a time. This section also provides for the amendment or revocation of an order of recognition granted to the press council, should the Minister form the opinion that the press council no longer adheres to the minimum requirements prescribed in Schedule 2. The press council must be afforded the opportunity to address the matters of concern prior to 343 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Finian McGrath.] the moving of any order. A draft of an order under section 43 must be approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas before the order is made by the Minister. I welcome the formation of the press council. In a recent dealing with the press council I found it very efficient and fair in regard to my case. I welcome the Bill to which there are many positive aspects. To my colleagues in the House, if they are having a debate, I ask them to look at the facts, deal with the issues and let us have less of the waffle.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: That gives me an opportunity to call on our Government backbencher cum Independent cum “Yes” cum “No” side to practice what he preaches. Incidentally, he appears anxious to crow about the fact that, according to himself, the HSE made a special award or grant to some group in his constituency, albeit a deserving group. I remind him he is not the only Member of the House and that the HSE has an equal obligation to every other Member. Under the rules of democracy, it must treat everyone equally, particularly as it is not an elected body. All Members have heard or read dubious statements which were damaging to the character, livelihood, well-being or professional life of an individual. This is a regular occurrence. There is a notion abroad that some reputations are more valuable than others. Everyone is entitled to fair treatment under the law and no one’s reputation, regardless of their position or profession, should be taken lightly when certain scribes are considering what they believe to be acceptable or certain legal eagles are considering what might get past the laws of libel. The case of a former Member of the House, the late Liam Lawlor, comes to mind. We all read disgraceful accounts of Mr. Lawlor’s death in the newspapers. Regardless of whether he was a member of a political party or parliament, it was disgraceful that certain media outlets took such latitude in the knowledge that Mr. Lawlor had died. The Bill will not address this problem because, as other speakers have noted, the dead cannot be libelled. Their families, however, can be seriously damaged as a result of comments that have been made on the basis that a deceased person is no longer in a position to take action against those who make them. It was ironic in the case of former Deputy Liam Lawlor that the matter was not as clear cut as the scribes and legal eagles believed and retribution was secured afterwards. Lessons must be learned from that case. While I am conscious of the need to maintain freedom of the press and of expression, these freedoms must be measured against the degree to which the reputation of a group, body, agency or individual can be damaged by telling lies. We all have a duty to tell the truth as best we can. We should not tell a deliberate lie or deliberately misconstrue or present a case in such a manner as to mislead. To do so is equivalent to tell a lie and will be damaging. This is the reason I referred to specific posters which all and sundry can see. It is damaging to lie in a fashion which detracts from the case made by another person, undermines his or her character or damages his or her reputation. When will we draw a line? In speaking inside or outside the House, Members seek to avoid damaging the reputation or character of individuals outside the House. This is as it should be because Members have privilege. Failure to observe privilege could result in its removal and the abuse of privilege is not excusable. Let us take a step further. What would happen if I or someone else were to decide to lie in such a manner as to damage a person’s character? Would it be sufficient to issue an apology in such circumstances? It has been argued that if an apology has been issued, this should be considered in determining whether a libel took place. This depends on the extent of the damage done by the libel. In certain circumstances, it is well nigh impossible to repair the damage done to a person’s reputation. If I write something which is defamatory and 344 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions demeaning of an individual, the damage to the his or her reputation can be such that an apology would in no way ameliorate it. For instance, if some scribe writes that a person has been accused of taking money, as occurs regularly, it severely damages the person’s reputation. However, allegations of a more personal nature, for instance, a wrongful accusation of child abuse, are so damaging that an apology would not ameliorate the harm done to the person’s reputation. The extent to which the issuing of an apology should be taken into account must, therefore, depend on the gravity and nature of the allegation given the potential to cause irreparable damage. The role of the press council has been raised. Members of the press, like public representatives, do a difficult job. If they become aware of a matter about which members of the public have a right to know, they have a duty to publish. However, they also have a duty to check the authenticity of what they publish and, in so far as possible, to verify and be reasonably sure of the facts beforehand. To do otherwise is dangerous. The practice of giving legal advice to the effect that it might be possible to get away with writing something is cynical and old-fashioned. We must strike a balance between, on the one hand, the public good and the right of members of the public to have information and, on the other, the likely damage in the event that the information to be published is wrong or the article in question is misleading. In the final analysis, one must always err on the side of caution. If I say or do something that causes irreparable damage to a person’s reputation, it is in the public interest that I fulfil my duty to give the other side of the story. While the majority of journals and journalists observe this rule, I am worried by the actions of the minority who sometimes exert a significant influence over the responsible majority. I will take as an extreme example the role of the paparazzi in pursuing the late Princess Diana. The type of activity in which this group of journalists engaged over a long period with a view to selling magazines or other publications was disgraceful and should not have been tolerated. While the media will argue that the lives of those in public life are ripe for comment, I recall a couple of cases in which journalists were not anxious to investigate members of their own profession. Everyone is entitled to privacy and members of the media have no right to camp outside someone’s hall door.

Debate adjourned.

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

Ceisteanna — Questions (Resumed).

Priority Questions.

————

Education Schemes. 75. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will change the qualifying criteria for the back to education allowance; if so, when she will implement these changes; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18884/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): My Department provides a wide range of second chance education opportunities to facilitate people on certain social welfare payments to improve their skills and qualifications and, therefore, their prospects of returning to the active workforce. The back to education allowance is one of these second chance education opportunities schemes. It is paid at a standard weekly rate equivalent to the 345 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] maximum rate of the relevant social welfare payment that qualifies the applicant for participation in the scheme. It essentially replaces his or her existing social welfare income and in addition an annual \400 cost of education allowance is payable. This will be increased to \500 from the beginning of the academic year 2008-09. To qualify for participation, an applicant must be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment and be at least 21 years of age prior to commencing an approved course of study. However, lone parents and persons in receipt of unemployment payments can qualify at 18 years of age provided they are out of formal education for at least two years. In general, an applicant must be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment for six months if pursuing a second level course or 12 months if pursuing a third level course. People who are awarded statutory redundancy may access the back to education allowance scheme immediately, provided an entitlement to a relevant social welfare payment is established prior to commencing an approved course of study. In addition, people who are participating in the national employment action plan process may qualify where a FA´ S employment services officer recommends that pursuance of a third level course of study is essential to the enhancement of the individual’s employment prospects. The current scheme has been subject to review and modification over the years to ensure it continues to support those people who are most distant from the labour market and whose need is greatest. I will continue to monitor the scheme but I believe that, overall, the back to education allowance scheme continues to meet its objectives and ensures that limited resources are targeted at those who are most in need. Any further changes that may be found to be required would have to be considered in a budgetary context in the light of the total amount of resources available to me for improvements in social welfare generally.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister has always claimed to be an advocate of equity of access to education, including in her last portfolio. Does she intend to change the eligibility criteria to include low paid workers, to whom this question really relates? Does she realise current Government policy is forcing people to seek the jobseeker’s allowance for one year in order that they can qualify for the back to education allowance? Is the Minister aware of the disparity in regard to payments? If one is on a full grant, one gets approximately \4,100 but if one is in receipt of the back to education allowance, one gets over \25,000 when everything is included. If one is on the minimum wage at \8.65 for 40 hours per week, one gets \346 per week. However, if one is in receipt of a social welfare payment with everything included, one gets \347 per week. Effectively, there is \1.21 in the difference. How is that equitable? Why is the Government intent on maintaining a policy that penalises low income earners and prevents them from participation in education?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: This is a very positive scheme given that 8,090 people are currently availing of it. Some 3,359 people are participating in second level education while 4,731 are participating in third level education. It is very much targeted at those in receipt of social welfare payments. The scheme is specifically for such people and not for those on low incomes. People on low incomes who qualify for third levels grants would probably qualify for the top- up grant as well. This scheme was designed to get people out of social welfare, with which the Deputy will agree.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: It is forcing people back into it.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is designed to ensure that it gives people the opportunity to go to education which would open the door for them to employment. The fact that more than 8,000 346 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions people are benefiting from the scheme means we are definitely targeting those on the live register as more than 5,500 of those people are on the live register. There are no plans to extend the scheme to those on low incomes.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: People are on the live register because this policy is forcing them on to it. If they stay on the minimum wage, they cannot get this allowance. The Minister is right that it is targeted at those on the live register. People are coming to my clinic, and I am sure to other people’s clinics, and the only advice one can give them is to go on the live register because they will then be able to avail of this payment. They simply cannot afford to go to third level if they are on the minimum wage. I am disappointed the Minister will not change this scheme. I urge her to reconsider because this policy forces people to seek the jobseeker’s benefit in order that they can avail of the scheme. If the Minister really believes in equity of access, she should re-examine this scheme. Many groups, including the Combat Poverty Agency, have called for a change. It seems the Minister does not appreciate the importance of this and the difficulties someone on the minimum wage faces in trying to get back to education.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The commitment to the scheme is shown by the fact that \70.8 million is being spent on it. It is important there are schemes targeted at people on social welfare. That is not to say there should not be other schemes targeted at people on low incomes. Part of the programme for Government seeks to ensure a free fees initiative for part-time courses.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: That is not in place.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is part of the programme for Government. We are only one year into the programme.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister’s party has been in government for 11 years.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: This is a new initiative, which is also part of social partnership, to try to target those who did not get an opportunity to participate in third level education. It was piloted in Tallaght Institute of Technology last September and it will be extended in the autumn. It will specifically target the people about whom the Deputy spoke, namely, those who did not benefit from higher education, who are on low incomes and who would not be in a position to give up those low incomes but who would be in a position to do part-time courses. That is a separate scheme which would target those people. We support people on low incomes and try to get them into education. However, the back to education allowance scheme is targeted primarily at those on social welfare and at trying to get them out of the trap which keeps them on social welfare.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: It forces them back into it.

Anti-Poverty Strategy. 76. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the large increase in supports requested of St. Vincent de Paul by members of the public in Dublin in the past 12 months; and the way she will respond to ensure that low income groups and individuals receive adequate welfare and pension support. [18626/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Society of St. Vincent de Paul has a proud tradition of supporting and championing the rights of the poorest members of our society. I am aware it recently expressed concerns about increased demands on its supports and services in the Dublin area. 347 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

I draw attention to the fact that people who are experiencing immediate financial emerg- encies can avail of the community welfare service which operates the exceptional and urgent needs payment schemes on behalf of my Department. Improvements in social welfare supports are normally introduced by way of the annual budget. Following budget 2008, overall social welfare spending in 2008 is projected to be just under \17 billion. This is an increase of \1.5 billion, or more than 10%, over 2007. Budget 2008 provided for increases in welfare rates of payment which are ahead of the projected increases in prices for 2008. These included: an increase in the maximum personal rates of contributory pension of \14, or 6.7%, per week, bringing them to \223.30, and an increase of \12 per week, or 6.5%, in the lowest personal rates of payment, bringing them to \197.80. Over the last five budgets, the lowest social welfare rates have increased by 58% compared with cumulative price increases of 17% in the same period. In 2004, the lowest social welfare rate of payment equated to 24% of gross average industrial earnings. In 2008, this rate will equate to 30%. In addition, a wide range of improvements for families with children were also announced. Following the budget, total child income support for a welfare dependent family with one young child will be \87.77 per week, or an increase of 7% over 2007. The level of increases introduced this year clearly demonstrates the Government’s determination to fully protect the most vulnerable in our society and to make real progress towards achieving our commitments for pensioners, carers, people with disabilities and all others relying in whole or in part on a welfare payment. I look forward to making further progress in this regard in the years ahead and I will certainly take into account the views put forward by the society and other welfare organisations in this regard.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: I congratulate the Minister on her appointment. I am filling in for Deputy Shortall. Does the Minister agree the alarm bells are ringing for the most deprived and those on low incomes in our society? The Society of St. Vincent de Paul, which I agree does outstanding work, has had a 70% increase in requests in the Dublin area alone since the beginning of the year. Looking at the consumer price index for April, does the Mini- ster agree a major problem is developing for those on low incomes? According to the Central Statistics Office, the price of milk has risen by 30%, the price of bread by 17%, the price of beef by 9% to 10% and the price of eggs by 14%. Rents have risen approximately 11%, the cost of mortgage interest has risen 16% and liquid fuels are up 31%, with diesel alone accounting for 16%. These are astonishing increases on the costs of essentials for people on low incomes. We know the cost of energy for such people generally accounts for 10% plus of their income and basic foodstuffs account for approximately 30% to 40% of it. Does the Minister not agree a dire situation is developing? We have, perhaps, just entered the Cowen recession where people are desperately trying to make ends meet. In my constituency, and probably in the Minister’s, the Saturdays of May are ones on which young children make their first communion. First communions take place in all parishes and many low-income families must deal with the extra costs involved. As we are now in a recession, does the Minister not agree that she needs to take urgent argent to index link social welfare awards and allowances to what is happening in the real economy?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I urge anybody who requires exceptional or urgent need payments, such as expenses relating to children, to seek the assistance available. Some \76 million has 348 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions been set aside in this year’s budget for that type of hardship payment. I hope people do not feel they have to depend on an organisation like the St. Vincent de Paul for that assistance. Food inflation has been significant over the past year, but in the past month it was significantly less, down to 0.1%. Hopefully, the situation has stabilised. Inflation relating to clothing and footwear has also declined over the past year. We are conscious of the increase in the cost of fuel and as a result the fuel allowance has doubled in the past three-year period. The period covered by the allowance has also been extended by a week in recognition of the difficulties some people have. Provision is made to support people on low incomes and social welfare through the budget. The budget rates have increased substantially, this year included, to well over the projected rate of inflation. It is a major priority of Government to try to ensure we keep ahead of inflation for our social welfare recipients and the moneys available are well targeted for that reason. We see the results of this in international studies showing the decline of the number of people here in consistent poverty. We must continue to improve in this area. I thank Deputy Broughan for his good wishes.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: This is the Minister’s first day answering questions on social and family affairs, but like all of us, she is aware of the issues. She mentioned community welfare assistance, which is valuable, but usually, when the Society of St. Vincent de Paul is called upon, this means people have not got the necessary support from community welfare, whatever the reason or their personal circumstances. Given the huge price increases and the rapid increase in unemployment, should the Minister consider a supplementary social welfare budget before the end of this session in July?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: There is no need for a supplementary budget at this stage. We encourage people, if necessary, to approach their community welfare officer to ensure they are getting the full benefit of schemes such as the family income supplement. Although there has been an increase in the number of people taking up family income supplement, it has not been adopted to full capacity yet. Perhaps some of the people in difficulty have not applied for it and could benefit from it. The same is true with regard to the opportunity to avail of other schemes, like rent supplement. I will meet members of the St. Vincent de Paul society this week to discuss their concerns.

Community Welfare Service. 77. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the direct consultation she has had with the community welfare service in respect of the transfer of its functions to her Department; the work undertaken between herself and the Health Service Executive to define the role of the community welfare officer; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18885/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: In February 2006, as part of its reform of the health sector, the Government decided that the administration of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, SWA scheme, as well as certain other functions, would transfer to the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Provision has been made in the Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2008 for the transfer of the administration of SWA to the Department to take place. This provision is subject to a commencement order. Officials from the Department, the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Executive have met the superintendent community welfare officers as a group on three occasions to provide information and to discuss issues related to this transfer. 349 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

In addition, officials are engaged on an ongoing basis in discussions with unions representing the community welfare service staff with regard to the transfer proposals. These discussions are being facilitated by an independent chairperson. While progress has been made in these discussions in some areas, a number of issues remain to be resolved. The intention is to reach a collective agreement with the unions that will address the concerns of all the staff involved. Discussions are also taking place with the Civil Service unions representing staff in the Depart- ment with regard to the transfer proposals. During the course of the discussions, the unions have sought assurances about the future role of community welfare officers and the discretionary element of the SWA scheme. Assur- ances have been given that when the service transfers to the Department, the existing flexibilities will be retained and the community welfare officers will continue to make discretionary payments under the SWA scheme. They will remain community based and will continue to provide key information, advice, advocacy and referral links between agencies. The integration of the community welfare service with the Department will allow for development of the role of community welfare officers. There is already a significant level of liaison between them and locally based staff in the Department. Under an integrated management structure, existing areas of duplication of work can be reduced, which will, ultimately, will lead to an improved and more efficient service for the public. The Department is moving to provide a more dynamic response to the needs of the unemployed, lone parents and persons with disabilities. This involves a more direct engagement with these groups and the introduction of a case management and activation approach. Community welfare officers have experience and expertise with regard to dealing with people who are disadvantaged. They are well placed to become involved in the development of the case management and activation approach. There will be ongoing consultation with staff on these developments. In the meantime, the Department’s priority is to maintain a high standard of service to the public during the implementation of the transfer of functions from the HSE.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: When this change was first mooted and discussed in the Da´il, Fine Gael expressed reservations about it. However, the decision was taken to go ahead with it. What prompted the change of heart with regard to the proportion of community welfare officers to be transferred? Initially, all of the officers were to be transferred, but now it appears 80% of them will be transferred to the Minister’s Department and 20% will remain with the Health Service Executive. What difference will there be between the functions of the 80% and 20%? Where will the Department’s community welfare officers, who are currently based in health centres around the country, be based? When will the groups concerned receive the promised document from the Department outlining their terms and conditions and, more importantly, their role? I make this inquiry not just on their behalf, but on behalf of the public, who are the ultimate consumers. The Minister mentioned in her response that the CWOs will retain their current flexibility and discretion and outlined in her response to Deputy Broughan earlier that people, rather than approaching the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, should be able to go to community welfare officers. However, there is genuine concern that they will no longer have the same discretion they have had to date.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: In response to the first question, in addition to dealing with the administration of social welfare schemes, community welfare officers are also engaged in health 350 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions and personal social services work, which includes means assessment for medical cards and nursing home subventions. These latter functions will remain with the HSE when the community welfare service transfers. It was on the basis of the work needing to be done in that regard that the division of staff resources between the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the HSE was agreed. That was agreed in consultation between the two Departments and under examination by an independent consultant as to the staff breakdown. With regard to where the community welfare officers will be based, I think that is part of the ongoing discussions and negotiations. However, if there is an answer, I will ensure the information is forwarded to the Deputy. On flexibility and discretion, community welfare officers will continue to have flexibility. It is important they are able to respond to local needs. This is part of ensuring we have an improved service delivery, because the change is all about providing a better service. It is particularly important to have an integrated service so all the income needs can be met by the one organisation, rather than as currently where community welfare officers are paid by funds provided by the Department of Social and Family Affairs to the HSE and dispense moneys provided by the Department, yet work under the ambit of the HSE.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: In doing that they are to some extent providing a one-stop-shop because the 80% of people have to go to the community welfare officer and for their health needs they have to go to the very small number of people who will provide that part of the function. That will cause a difficulty. The Minister said the location is part of the discussion——

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I do not know. If there is an answer I will get it for Deputy Enright.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: I appreciate that but I ask the Minister to take on board the extra cost that could be involved in this. It is not just part of a discussion from the CWO’s perspective but from that of the Minister’s Department if it has to provide facilities around the country for almost 700 CWOs. Has the Minister budgeted for that? Who will make the ultimate call on the discretionary payment? Under the new system will there be a person who will be considered to be at a higher level in the Department of Social and Family Affairs who will check on these types of payments? I fear that would increase rigidity in the system and make it almost like the full application process for social and family affairs payments.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy will be aware that these discussions are sensitive and the National Implementation Body arranged the establishment of the group of SIPTU, IMPACT, the HSE and the Departments of Heath and Children and Social and Family Affairs, which had intensive discussions, culminating last month. It is anticipated that the group will reconvene very shortly. It is waiting for the management to summarise its proposals on this and I would welcome any collective agreement that could be reached on it. All the issues raised here today are part of that.

Social Welfare Appeals. 78. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs how she proposes to address the high number of claims involving a medical decision that are initially refused but then allowed on appeal. [18604/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: My Department processes almost 2 million applications for benefit, pension or allowance each year, only a small percentage of which result in an appeal to the social welfare appeals office. A claimant who is dissatisfied with the decision of a deciding officer of the Department, including a decision based on medical criteria, may appeal it to the social welfare appeals office. In addition to affording customers the right of appeal, all 351 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] customers who receive an adverse decision are advised of their right to have their claim reviewed by a deciding officer where new facts or fresh evidence come to light. These procedures can enable a speedy resolution of the appeal as the deciding officer may make a revised decision on foot of the new evidence received without the necessity to go through the appeals mechanism. Confirmation of medical eligibility is critical in processing and maintaining illness benefit, invalidity pension, disability allowance, occupational injuries benefit and carers schemes. Fig- ures for 2007, the latest year for which appeals statistics are available, show that 7,400 appeals were lodged regarding these schemes, although some of these may have related to non-medical conditions. It should be noted that this represents only a proportion of cases disallowed as many people do not appeal adverse decisions. Of the 7,400 appeals, almost 2,400 were revised by a deciding officer before proceeding to appeal. In many of these cases, the claimant had obtained additional medical evidence from his or her GP or consultant which formed the basis for a revised decision. In the balance of cases, almost 5,000, appeals were allowed in 1,767 cases, 147 appeals were partially allowed, 1,907 appeals were disallowed and 1,222 were withdrawn. In cases which proceed to the social welfare appeals office where medical issues are involved, appeals officers, as well as taking account of reports from medical assessors of the Department, must also take account of medical reports furnished by the appellant and any other evidence, including evidence adduced at an oral hearing where appellants have the opportunity to explain how they are affected by their condition.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: Is it not astonishing that almost half of the social welfare appeals were allowed in the system the Minister outlined? Up to 56% of invalidity pension appeals were fully allowed, 53% of occupational injury appeals were fully or partially allowed and 33% of respite care grants were allowed. Are these not very significant figures? Do they not put the spotlight on the frontline deciding officers? Is the Minister happy there is adequate training and guidelines for deciding officers? The Minister said that a deciding officer can do a review at the point of appeal but how often does that happen? Are there many more cases in addition to the 14,000 cases the Minister read out where an appeal is already operating? Is it not true that many appeals relate to what one might call borderline injury benefit disability allowance type claims? There were 19,989 applications for disability allowance in 2007 and 2,754 appeals. That is a very significant and striking number. In these borderline cases, particularly where there is a medical element, do we need a new system? Anybody who has had long experience of this area, such as the four Deputies present, probably decided long ago that we should have an independent appeals system. Has the Minister thought about that? Does she believe there should be a statutory independent appeals system and will she take that initiative in her administration?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I am interested in the figures Deputy Broughan cited on disability allowance. Although he is correct in saying that 2,754 cases were appealed, of that number, 700 were not allowed and 568 were withdrawn.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: However, 530 were approved so those people would have got no benefit.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: That is the advantage of having an appeals process and it is an important part of the process. Given that 2 million applications are made every year, I thought the number of appeals was small. The major difference in making the appeal is that one is allowed to enclose additional medical information with the appeal. Sometimes that makes the 352 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions difference. Often people do not supply sufficient medical information in the first part of their application and when invited to send more it seems to make the difference. I cannot comment on putting social welfare appeals on a statutory basis.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: Perhaps the Minister will review and look into it. Will she come back on the two points I raised, namely, whether she thinks we need better guidelines and more training for frontline officers, the people who make that decision, given that sometimes Deputies hear complaints that people were not listened to? For example, in the recent huge increase in the number of people seeking jobseeker’s benefit, I received those kinds of complaints. What is the total cost to the Exchequer of the appeals system?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Ongoing professional training is an important part of the work of the frontline people, particularly medical assessors. Medical assessors are full time, fully qualified and registered people. Medical education is carried out by national and international experts to ensure they are on top of their jobs. That is important, particularly in the area of disability. Some decisions on whether a person qualifies can be made as a desk examination based on the information supplied. Other applications require further information because of an examination. That is a central part of it. I have a figure of \539,500 for the cost of the appeals system.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: Is that it?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I am not sure I am referring to the correct figure.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: Perhaps the Minister will come back to us on that.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I will check the budget for the whole appeals process.

Social Welfare Benefits. 79. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of persons who benefited from rent supplement for each of the past three years; the annual cost of rent supplement for same; the number of people in receipt of the rent supplement for more than 18 months; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18886/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Rent supplement is administered on behalf of the Department by the Health Service Executive, HSE, as part of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. The purpose of the rent supplement scheme is to provide short-term income support to eligible people living in private rented accommodation, whose means are insufficient to 3 o’clock meet their accommodation costs and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source. The numbers claiming rent supplement have remained fairly constant in the past three years. At the end of 2005, these were 60,200 rent supplements in payment. At the end of 2006 there were 59,900 and at the end of 2007 there were 59,700. At the end of April 2008 numbers had increased to 62,000. Expenditure on the rent supplement scheme has increased in the past three years from \368 million in 2005, to \388 million in 2006 and \391 million in 2007. Some \392 million has been provided for the scheme in 2008. The rent scheme has also witnessed an increase in the duration of entitlement with almost 32,000 recipients now getting a supplement for 18 months or more. For this reason, the scheme has to be viewed in the context of overall housing policy, particularly in the case of long-term claimants. In response to this situation, in July 2004 the Government introduced new rental assistance arrangements which include the rental accommodation scheme, RAS. This gives local authorities specific responsibility for meeting the longer-term housing needs of people receiving 353 Priority 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] rent supplement for 18 months or more, on a phased implementation basis. Housing authorities can meet the housing needs of these individuals through a range of approaches including the traditional range of social housing options, the voluntary housing sector and, in particular, a public private partnership type rental accommodation scheme. To date just under 6,500 rent supplement cases have been transferred to RAS units. Almost 3,000 of these are in the voluntary and co-operative housing sector and 3,500 are in private rented accommodation. Housing authorities have also transferred more than 6,400 recipients to other social housing options. When the new rental assistance arrangements have been fully implemented it is expected that in excess of 30,000 individuals will have transferred from the rent supplement scheme to the local authorities under the rental accommodation scheme or other social housing schemes. The Department is working closely with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to ensure that RAS meets its objective of catering for those on long-term rent supplement.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: First, is the Department of Social and Family Affairs moving into providing for long-term housing needs? Is this now becoming a core function of the Department? Second, the Minister, a little like her predecessor, has waxed lyrical on the benefits of RAS. In the areas where it is working it is quite positive and I recognise it is in its infancy. Despite that, 6,500 persons have transferred onto RAS, yet the numbers taking rent supplement have grown in the same period. The Minister stated that the numbers claiming rent supplement have remained fairly constant in the past three years, but there has still been a sizeable increase — up to 62,000 this year. How does the Government intend to address that? Despite spending the vast sums that the Minister has mentioned in rent supplement, why does her Department continue to ignore the issue of quality and standards? If there was an example of anything showing a lack of joined-up thinking in Government, it is this. The Mini- ster spoke of rent supplement being part of the overall housing policy. Who in the Government is in charge of the overall housing policy and what level of co-ordination exists? It seems there is little co-ordination. It seems the supplement is paid regardless of the quality or standard of the accommodation and that is quite unacceptable. Will the rent supplement be used to fill this housing need indefinitely or how does the Minister intend to tackle the fact that so many people are on it for more than 18 months? Is RAS the only solution the Minister has in mind?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The rent supplement was always intended to be a short-term scheme.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: It is long-term now.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The fact that it then grew and there were so many people on it for 18 months or more was the reason for developing the RAS. People were becoming dependent on the rent supplement for their housing needs which was never the intention behind it. The intention is to ensure that these people can be facilitated through the local authorities’ various schemes, whether through RAS units or social housing, and that co-ordination is now taking place. Every local authority in the country now has staff designated to deal with this. RAS is still in its infancy and it is more successful in some local authorities than others. It is not fair to say that the Department of Social and Family Affairs is involved in long- term housing provision. It is not. The idea is to ensure that rather than being ignored by their 354 Other 14 May 2008. Questions local authorities on their housing lists, these people would now become a central part of it. The success of RAS to date, even though the numbers overall could be considered to be fairly low, shows its potential. It is the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the local authorities which are responsible for housing — it is not the responsibility of the Department of Social and Family Affairs — and they are also the people who can determine whether a rent supplement can be given depending on the conditions of the housing.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: If the Minister thinks that RAS and social housing will solve all the rent supplement problems, she has much to consider. She has not mentioned the commitment in the programme for Government to examine the reforming of rent supplement. When will that happen? Will it be a priority for her? In examining that reform — whenever this one of the many programme for Government commitments is met — will she confirm that her Department and other relevant Departments will look at the issues of quality, the lack of responsiveness to market change and the fact, as has been discussed in the Chamber with her predecessor, that when a person’s landlord gets the rent supplement there is no check as to whether he or she is paying tax on it? The latter is a valuable source of revenue the Government can not afford to turn its back on at this time.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Last year the system was reviewed and as a result the rent supplement was increased in 14 local authority areas. It is the intention that it will be reviewed over the next few weeks with a view to it coming into effect on 1 July 2008. That review will be taking place——

Deputy Olwyn Enright: What about an overall reform review?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: ——between the HSE, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the CSO, the Private Rented Tenancies Board and interested voluntary organisations interested. It is one of those schemes that needs to be kept constantly under review, particularly to see how it is working in getting people into appropriate housing. The big difference between the RAS and the rent supplement is that the RAS is available to people who can engage in full-time employment, and that must be one of its key successes. Transferring people from rent supplement, which brings with it a dependency on social welfare, to the RAS would allow people to work as well. Obviously, it is means tested but it would target those on low incomes who up until now would not be able to benefit from employment.

Other Questions.

————

Social Welfare Payments. 80. Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will undertake an awareness campaign to assure people about the new social services card for collection of social welfare payments; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18708/08]

90. Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the measures in place to assist people in receipt of social welfare payments in using the new social services card to collect payments at the post office as social welfare books are being phased out; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18707/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I propose to take Questions Nos. 80 and 90 together. 355 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

The Department supports Government policy which aims to facilitate the greater use of electronic payment systems in the economy in the interests of developing a world class payments environment in Ireland. Our payment strategy is designed to ensure that cost-effective arrangements are in place for making payments to social welfare customers by using a range of payment options and to ensure that new payment facilities are made available to customers as they arise. The Department is implementing a three year strategy to change paper based payment instruments to electronic payments at post offices, banks and other financial institutions on a phased basis. Currently, some 74% of customers receive their payment electronically direct to their post office or financial institution. A range of measures are under way to inform customers of the change in payment methods and to address any concerns they may have regarding the use of the social services card to collect their payment at post offices. Each person is being informed by personal letter of the change in their payment arrangement. A social services card, along with a covering letter explaining how to use the card, is also being issued to them. Posters are being displayed in all post offices, citizens information centres and throughout the Department’s local office network. An Post and the Irish Postmaster’s Union, IPU, are committed to assisting customers in the use of social services cards for collecting their payment. In this regard An Post, supported by the IPU, has recently initiated a nationwide publicity campaign informing people about receiving their social welfare payment using a social services card at post offices. Stakeholders and customers representing the elderly, people with disabilities, the unemployed and other focus groups have already been consulted and have welcomed the move to electronic payment at post offices. In addition, the change from paper to electronic payment is a key element of all public information events, seminars and information briefings being carried out by the Department in the coming year. I am confident that the planned range of measures to inform customers of the change to electronic payment will ensure a smooth transition for them.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: I welcome the clarification on the campaign that will be undertaken, particularly measures to contact people, raise awareness etc. There was genuine concern about the move to this new type of payment, particularly among the small and diminishing numbers who are not used to the electronic world at present. I want to ask the Minister two supplementary questions on this matter. Has she any intention of using this as an opportunity to push for a greater degree of financial inclusion and to encourage particular groups, such as older people and lone parents, who do not have savings accounts to use it as an opportunity to promote that idea as well, particularly in the post offices? There has been a degree of confusion on this issue. Elderly people are currently able to sign the back of their book for a couple of weeks and allow somebody else to collect the payment for them. There is concern about how that will operate under the new electronic system. If somebody signs a form, how long will that form last? Elderly people can be abused by others who are supposed to care for them but who are trying to get some financial gain out of the abuse. I want to ensure the system is watertight so that cannot happen.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The potential to use the card would enable all sorts of other schemes to be incorporated in it, such as transferring the money into a savings account and a payment account. It can be examined as it is used over the years. The Deputy mentioned those people who might not be familiar with technology, but 70% of new applicants for State contributory 356 Other 14 May 2008. Questions pensions and child benefit opted to use the electronic card. Perhaps older people are not as unable to use the technology as we think.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: I am not suggesting they are not.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is encouraging. Having agents to collect for elderly people was a key issue for them. If an elderly person needs to appoint an agent, those arrangements will be made. Special arrangements will be made from next June and if it must be done in the long term, a letter will issue from the Department enabling the carer or agent to collect the payment.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: It is also my main concern that it would be more difficult for the relatives of older people and of people with a disability to access payments for them. In my usual portfolio of transport, we are pursuing the new smart card for the Dublin transport system. The comment has been made that there is much scope for integrating a transport smart card with other facilities. Have officials from the Department of Social and Family Affairs spoken to the transport authorities or the banks about more streamlined services? There is capacity for many technical activities on cards, such as the Oyster card on the London transport system.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Wide consultations took place regarding electronic payments, but it may well have been with those bodies that represent the recipients. I do not know if consultation took place on a wider basis, but I could certainly envisage that happening once it is up and running. This card enables the payment of money into accounts, as opposed to a card that allows for free travel or an integrated transport service. I would love to arrive at a situation where these cards are widely used, but it is a very specific card for payment at the moment. I believe the aims of this card will be achieved and perhaps we could have more consultation on it with other bodies over the coming years.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: It is a card for payment that will allow a person to get a full entitlement that week at the post office, or wherever. My concern is that elderly people might be vulnerable. Can the Minister clarify exactly how a payment can be collected by an agent? At the moment, a person can sign one, two or seven cheques and allow somebody else to cash them and bring back the money. Therefore, the person retains a degree of control. My concern with this card system is that a form will have to be signed which contains a date specifying how long somebody is entitled to collect the person’s payment. What checks are in the system to ensure there is no abuse? Sadly, we could all refer to instances where that has happened in the past. Perhaps the Minister could concentrate on that issue when she is discussing the card with the various interested groups.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: A person can claim a pension payment for up to 100 days and this continues to be the case. When payment is made, a receipt is given indicating the amount and what it was for. It includes the breakdown of the payment, such as whether there were qualified adults or children included in the payment. An agent collecting on a long-term basis will have to get a letter from the Department authorising him or her to do that. For people aged over 75, the paper payment is often more comfortable and it continues without question.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: I know there will be an agent facility, but I am concerned about the checks ensuring the payment goes to the intended recipient at the end of the day. I am not convinced the checks are there for the swipe card, which is something we need to ensure.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Department and An Post are jointly working on a system which will facilitate the agent, with a view to rolling it out at the end of next month. 357 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

Deputy Olwyn Enright: I am concerned about facilitating the person who is entitled to the payment, not the agent.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It will facilitate the use of an agent by the recipient. Safeguards will have to be put in place to make sure the money is going to the right person.

Departmental Records. 81. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the guidelines or procedures in place within her Department to safeguard sensitive personal information of the public when lost or stolen; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18706/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Department of Social and Family Affairs administers around 50 schemes and makes payments to 1 million people each week. Due to the nature, scale and diversity of its work, the Department is heavily reliant on ICT and holds detailed information about its customers. The Department takes its responsibilities to safeguard this data extremely seriously. All electronic data is stored in the Department’s primary computer site. The site itself has rigorous control procedures and site perimeter protection. There are arrangements in place for inter-site back-up of data. Security arrangements, including encryption, are in place to cover the necessary transfer of data to other agencies for service delivery purposes. Our systems are subject to standard physical security measures. Industry standard security protocols, such as password protection and security software, are deployed to protect all devices supplied by the Department and to preserve the confidentiality of data. Given their small size and portable nature, it is more likely that portable devices may fall into the wrong hands than a desktop system. It is the Department’s policy not to hold sensitive personal data on laptops. Should we decide that we need such data on these devices, it will be encrypted. Procedures for the management and maintenance of portable devices are currently under review by the Department and revised operational guidelines are at an advanced stage of development. Every effort is made by the Department to ensure that personal customer data is used solely for business purposes and that it is not compromised in any way. Over the last number of years, the Department has continuously strengthened security and data protection protocols. Policies and procedures governing the use of systems and data have been developed and communicated to staff. These policies and procedures are under constant review and are updated as appropriate. Staff are regularly reminded of their obligations under data protection and security policies and of the penalties applicable in respect of any breach of these policies. In addition to the policy measures, the Department is also ensuring that higher levels of data protection are built into its latest generation of ICT systems to reflect the increased threats in this area. Considerable resources have also been devoted to increasing the security and monitoring facilities in its older systems.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House. A high-level group has been established within the Department to review access management and control. The primary focus of the group is to direct the development of the Department’s policy on access to data, ensure that existing measures are co-ordinated across systems and to initiate further work programmes to address emerging issues. In order to preserve public confidence in the operations of the Department, there has been considerable focus on the issue of data confidentiality. The Department recognises that security measures must continually evolve and it will continue to reflect this in its systems and procedures. 358 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

Deputy Olwyn Enright: It was the issue regarding the banks that prompted me to put down this question. In recent years, eight items have been taken from officials of the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Five of those items were laptops taken from civil servants, three of which were taken in the home, one from a car and one from public transport. Were any of these items recovered? Did these events trigger any response within the Department at the time? What kind of information was on these laptops? The Minister stated it is not policy to hold sensitive information on laptops, so can she confirm there was no such information on these stolen laptops? Is the Minister satisfied that the most up-to-date encryption data is used? We in this House were told there would be examination taking place of the encryption on the equipment we use. I am concerned that the same facilities may be operating in the Department of Social and Family Affairs as operate here and I would not like to think that is the case.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The five laptops and three mobile phones relate to the six year period since 2002.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: The data is out there.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: None of them was recovered but none contained sensitive information so people need have no worries in that respect. Encryption is an important aspect where information is being passed from one agency to another. Of all Departments, my Department is conscious that it holds personal information such as identity, PRSI contributions and claim activity. Some 6.8 million datasets are held by the Department of Social and Family Affairs for current and past recipients. Staff who wish to access information need a password, a personal account on a very secure network and authorisation from senior management. For inhouse and external information transfer the best security measures in information technology are constantly reviewed. A senior unit in the Department monitors this.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: Is the Minister saying the disaster in the UK, when 25 million sets of information were transferred between the inland revenue and the work and pension sector, could not happen here? The Minister referred to the data protection section. Have the Minister and her predecessor thoroughly reviewed the procedures in that section in light of the number of cases of improper accessing of data? Two years ago, it was alleged that 72 officials accessed the data of the winner of a large prize in the Euromillions. Every few months we get a disturbing instance of this. In October 2007 someone was prosecuted for accessing the records of 40 individuals. A recent report includes a serious allegation that an official improperly accessed information and passed it on to people engaged in criminality. Has the data protection unit been reviewed and have its procedures been assessed in light of these disturbing reports on personal information?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Any breach of confidentiality is inexcusable and is not tolerated in the Department. Disciplinary action, up to dismissal, has always been taken in cases over the past few years. Given the number of staff and the amount of information held, the number of incidents is small and few staff have been involved. That is not to excuse it because people need the comfort of knowing their information is secure. The Department is examining the most up to date ways in Ireland and internationally of protecting information. There is a multi- year programme to implement a new information security architecture for the whole system. In so far as people can have confidence that their information is private, the Department goes 359 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] to the nth degree to ensure confidentiality is maintained and the information is protected, whether the information is kept inhouse or transferred elsewhere.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: Does the Minister have a figure for the number of laptops issued to staff in her Department? Bearing in mind that sensitive information is not stored on them, what type of work are laptops used for? Is there a grade of civil servant issued with a laptop or do community welfare officers have them?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I do not know how many are issued but I am quite sure it is more than the five that were stolen over a six year period. I will check if the information is available.

Social Welfare Benefits. 82. Deputy Sea´n Barrett asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if, in the upcoming review of the Towards 2016 social partnership agreement, she will ensure that greater priority is given to affording older people greater social protection in the areas of poverty, inequality, access to basic services, age discrimination in employment and social exclusion; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13623/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The vision for older people as set out in the social partnership agreement, Towards 2016, is to enable people to maintain their health and well-being and to live full and active lives in an independent way in their own homes and communities for as long as possible. The agreement already includes a wide range of commitments regarding older people in the area of pensions, long-term care, housing and accommodation, mobility, health services and education and employment opportunities. These commitments, which are elaborated in the new national action plan for social inclusion 2007-16, adopt a co-ordinated approach across a range of policy areas, reflecting the complex nature of poverty and social exclusion, which is multifaceted in its causes and effects. The plan, in addition to the 12 high level goals, contains 17 targets focussed on older people. Responsibility for the implementation of different aspects of the plan, and the commitments in Towards 2016, rest with the appropriate Minister. Access to basic services is a matter for the Minister for Health and Children, discrimination in employment will be dealt with by the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment while equality issues are the responsibility of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. For my part the priority is in the area of income support, and significant progress is already being made in these areas. Increases in pensions granted over successive budgets, which have been consistently higher than both inflation and wages, have made a major contribution to tackling poverty. The future of our pensions system is a major theme in Towards 2016 with a commitment to publish a Green Paper on pensions and to develop a framework for long-term policy in this area. The Green Paper was published in October 2007 and a consultation process on its contents is drawing to a close. The Government will respond to the consultations by developing a framework for the future of pensions and it is planned to finalise this by the end of the year. The needs of older people have always been a priority for this Government and this will remain the position. I will ensure that the good progress being made on the aspects of the agreement for which the Department is responsible is maintained.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: Deputy Barrett had hoped to take this question but he is in a committee meeting. The Minister listed the Ministers responsible for various areas but who is the appropriate Minister for older people? With the appointment of 20 Ministers of State yesterday I hoped we would have clarity on the appropriate person. According to the Taoiseach, the 360 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

Minister of State dealing with older people is Deputy Ma´ire Hoctor. Can the Minister outline the functions she has from the perspective of the Department of Social and Family Affairs as opposed to the functions the Minister will retain?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I did outline who the appropriate Minister was, stating that basic health services was a matter for the Minister for Health and Children, discrimination in employment is dealt with by the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and equality issues are the responsibility of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The area of concern to my Department is income support and pensions.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: Is the Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, the person who will co- ordinate that?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy asked where the areas of responsibility lie. The Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, is assigned to the Departments of Health and Children, Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Social and Family Affairs. Her job is to co-ordinate a strategy for older people, drawing on those three areas.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: Will the Minister of State deal with income support for older people within the Department of Social and Family Affairs or will she deal with strategy?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Pensions and income support is a central role of mine. I see the pensions strategy as one of the major items that must be addressed.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: I used to stand in this position when Deputy Dermot Ahern was the Minister for Social and Family Affairs. His target was £100 per week for the contributory State pension. In the era of the Celtic tiger we went past that. I tried to get him to commit to having the State pension as a high percentage, perhaps 35%-40%, of the average industrial wage. Deputy Ahern refused to do so while he was the Minister. I refer to Professor Eamon O’Shea’s fine study Older & Bolder. Is it not true that there is a 27% risk of poverty if the older cohort is examined? Are we still not the lowest of the EU 15 in terms of income support? An area that impinges on the Minister’s portfolio is the growing danger of fuel poverty. It was stated in that study that senior citizens in Ireland are at greater risk of dying of hypothermia than their counterparts in Finland. It is astonishing that an Irish man or woman is at greater risk of dying of hypothermia than a person living in Finland with its harsh, long and dark winters. This is an indictment of the Government which, following 11 years in power, has not addressed fundamental issues of income support. Some six, seven or eight years ago there was much talk about our finally coming to grips with the pension issue through the provision of an adequate three-legged pension for senior citizens. Is it not the case that the Government frittered away all of the money of the Celtic tiger on all kinds of madcap schemes initiated by the former Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern? Eleven years on, the Government still has not addressed the fundamental issue of pensions, which will be a serious problem for this country when the so-called baby boomers begin to reach retirement age. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, now has responsibility for addressing these matters and, in particular, the sufferings of a significant number of senior citizens under her Administration.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I accept that pensions and the development of a long-term pension strategy are significant issues requiring to be addressed. The consultation process runs until the end of this month. A major forum will be held at the end of this month in Dublin Castle following which all ideas will be brought together. I should point out, however, that there is 361 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] no consistency of approach in the submissions received to date. I do not for one minute imagine this will be an easy issue to tackle. However, it is an issue to which I will afford priority. It is also worth mentioning, given that Deputy Broughan mentioned the £100 pension, that the contributory old age pension now stands at \223.30 per week and the qualified adult pension is \200. Also, the non-contributory pension is \212 per week while a qualified adult receives \140 per week. This illustrates the Government’s commitment during the past few years to ensuring——

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: What is the average industrial wage?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Pensioners are not in receipt of the average industrial wage.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: They live in the same world.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: This also illustrates that the rate of consistent poverty for older people in this country has reduced from 3.1% to 2.2% which means that the targets to be achieved by 2012 have already been met. This says a great deal about the Government’s commitment in this regard.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: The Minister needs to go beyond that now. May I ask a brief supplementary?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We are well over time, but the Deputy may ask a brief supplementary.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: I want to make a few suggestions to the Minister in respect of her Administration——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I would prefer it if the Deputy asked questions.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: I want to ask the Minister about pensioners aged over 80 years. A qualified adult, usually a woman, does not receive further increases in payment when she reaches 80 years of age. Is this an issue the Minister intends to address? Her predecessors failed to address it and many other issues affecting women and, in particular, widows. I ask that the Minister examine these issues.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: There has been some discussion in regard to the over 80 age group. Obviously, I would like to work towards ensuring there is equality for women in social welfare services.

83. Deputy John Perry asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her Department will continue to use and maximise its usage of post offices for all types of social welfare payments; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18710/08]

89. Deputy John Perry asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the calls by the Irish Postmasters Union at its annual conference for the Government to recognise post offices as the provider of choice for the delivery of social welfare payments; if she will make a commitment on same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18709/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I propose to take Questions Nos. 83 and 89 together. In 1992, my Department and An Post entered into a five-year contract for the delivery of payments. This contract was renewed in 1997 for a further three years to the end of 1999. The 362 Other 14 May 2008. Questions award of a further extension of the contract in 2000 became subject to complaints to the European Commission under competition and procurement law. On 13 November 2007, the European Court of Justice ruled in Ireland’s favour. However, this was on the basis of lack of proofs by the Commission rather than on legal principle. The judgment also indicated that the services which fall under Directive 18/2004/EC, Annex ll B, must be subject to advertising if they may be of interest to undertakings within the member state concerned or in other member states. Legal advice on the judgment is being reviewed within my Department. In the meantime, the current arrangements with An Post for the delivery of social welfare payments remain in place. The procurement of supplies and services by public bodies is governed by EU procurement directives and by national public procurement policy, as enunciated in guidelines issued by the Department of Finance. In broad terms, public procurement policy is aimed at ensuring that the taxpayer obtains value for money and that the public procurement function is dis- charged honestly and fairly. Therefore, placing a contract directly with An Post without a competitive process would contravene EU and national procurement rules and could result in further legal action against the State. With regard to the operation of the post office network and the location of post offices, this is a matter for the board of An Post which comes under the remit of the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. An Post and my Department have been partners in the delivery of social welfare payment services since the foundation of the State and there is every reason to believe that An Post and the network of post offices will continue to play a significant role in the delivery of social welfare payments in the future.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister’s response, through no fault of her own, has caused me to be more rather than less concerned for the future of rural post offices. I accept An Post does not come within the remit of her Department. However, 500 post offices have been closed in the past eight years. This, coupled with a halving in the past ten years in the number of social welfare payments paid through post offices and the reduction in the number of bill payments at post offices, is a cause of genuine concern. The Minister stated her Department had received legal advice on the judgment of 13 November from the European Court of Justice. When is it expected the review of that legal advice will be completed? Also, will the Minister give a commitment that she will during her tenure of office and, within the law and European regulations, try to ensure as many payments as possible can be made through post offices, a declining but important part of rural communities?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: As Deputy Enright stated, my Department must comply with competition law, European regulations, services directives and so on and cannot do anything that goes against them. At the same time, however, everybody appreciates the value of the post office in terms of accessibility for recipients of social welfare payments. An Post currently plays a major role in regard to the provision of such services and I envisage it will continue to play a strong role in this regard.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: The post office has been called the fortress of rural life, the place where senior citizens and others can meet, communicate and keep up to date with neighbours and friends and with what is going on in the community in terms of local events. It is a shocking indictment of the Government that it has since 2002, as my colleague said, closed 500 post offices. I note that Leitrim has lost 41% of its post offices and that Cavan, Sligo and Westmeath have each lost approximately 40% of their post offices. One of the hallmarks of this Administration has been its decimation of the post office network. Did this need to happen? 363 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

[Deputy Thomas P. Broughan.]

The Minister continually refers to the European Union, but surely it is the responsibility of the Government to pursue a universal service obligation in regard to postal services notwithstanding the 2009 liberalisation directive. What is happening now is that a key part of rural infrastructure is being removed. The Government is complicit in this and the Minister is not playing a strong enough role in this regard.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I am sure the Deputy appreciates fully that from the perspective of the Department of Social and Family Affairs any future contracting arrangements will have to be in the form of tender and must be transparent. It is significant to note that 46% of payments made to 1.8 million recipients every week are made through post offices.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: It was 80% ten years ago.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: People now have a wider choice and can have their payments made through the post office, bank, credit union or other recognised financial institution.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: That is a big change.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is interesting to note that people on long-term schemes use their books. Some 384,000 people and 272,000 child benefit customers are paid electronically while others such as job-seekers, one-parent families and early child care supplement recipients receive their payments through the post office. A significant number of people continue to choose to use post offices. I see it as important to give them the choice and, as the Deputy stated, it is important for rural Ireland. I accept post offices play an important role in rural Ireland. Everything we do must be transparent.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: Has the Department had discussions with An Post and its partner, Fortis, with regard to the banking system, the orange part of the green, white and orange image of the new An Post? Has the Minister had discussions on linking the small local banking services into the social welfare and post office operation? Will she do this in her administration?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I am not yet aware what talks have taken place in this regard.

Live Register. 84. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the large percentage increases in people signing on at certain social welfare offices; the extra resources she will provide for the job facilitation service to meet the growing demand at these offices; and the work of her Department in co-ordinating welfare to work measures with other Departments and State agencies. [18627/08]

Deputy Mary Hanafin: I am aware of the increase in the national live register in recent months and I am satisfied that the Department is monitoring the impact of this on local offices on an ongoing basis. At present a network of 40 facilitators work closely at local level with social welfare customers, including those on the live register, in order to determine training and development needs. They arrange, through direct provision or jointly with other agencies, appropriate training and developmental programmes to equip recipients to progress to employment, enhance their parenting skills or otherwise improve their life opportunities. This service will shortly be enhanced with the assignment of an additional 30 facilitators over the remainder of 2008 as part of a wider activation programme provided for under the national development plan. 364 Other 14 May 2008. Questions

This social and economic participation programme is aimed at all people of working age regardless of the circumstances that led the person to require income maintenance. The cost of the programme will be \50 million over the duration. In the first three years \13 million will be invested, following which it will be reviewed and a decision made on the extent and content of the programme over the following years. The enhanced facilitation service will build on the Department’s existing experience and income maintenance relationship with the people concerned, in co-operation with other relevant service providers such as FA´ S, the VECs, the HSE and other local agencies. The vision is of a single transparent system with a primary focus on the customer and a route map starting at the first point of engagement with the Department. For those on the live register, the main welfare to work measure is the national employment action plan, NEAP. Under this plan, people who are approaching three months on the live register are referred to FA´ S for interview with a view to job placement or an offer of training. Almost 9,400 people were referred to FA´ S under the NEAP in the first two months of 2008. Of these, 33%, or 3,060, have left the live register. There is also a range of support services in place to assist unemployed people, particularly the long-term unemployed, lone parents and sickness-related welfare recipients to return to the active labour market either by taking up employment or becoming self-employed. These are provided through the operation of the back to education and back to work allowance schemes, the technical assistance and training grants and the PRSI exemption scheme.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House. The activation and family services programme and the second chance education opportunities scheme also offer supports to social welfare customers and other disadvantaged persons to assist them to improve their employability and personal and family circumstances. At the end of March 2008, 43,000 people were availing of employment and training supports offered by the Department. Overall, I am satisfied that existing arrangements, together with the proposed wider activation programme under the NDP, provide a satisfactory level of co-ordination to ensure that the needs of the most marginalised are met in a positive manner.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: The increases on the live register in some districts throughout the country are truly astonishing. Portlaoise has had a 70% increase in people signing on, Monaghan and Kells have had increases of 51%, Trim and Portarlington have had increases of 55%, Navan has had an increase of 41%, Ballybofey has had an increase of 48% and Carlow has had an increase of 44%. Some of these places are in the constituencies of Fianna Fa´il Ministers. These are astonishing figures in this downturn and the Cowen recession we are possibly entering. Does the Minister have any intention of undertaking strong locally targeted initiatives with FA´ S in areas such as Portlaoise, Portarlington and the other areas I listed where we seem to have had a massive collapse in employment? This is an urgent matter. It is necessary for the Minister, with the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Coughlan, and the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy O´ Cuı´v, to come up with answers.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy is being a little bit dramatic. While he is right to state increases have taken place in certain offices, such as Clones, Portlaoise and Macroom, the overall live register saw a reduction on last month.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: That is cold comfort to those in Portlaoise. 365 Adjournment 14 May 2008. Debate Matters

Deputy Mary Hanafin: There is no crisis.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: The annual figures——

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is not fair to state the employment situation has gone out of control, far from it as more jobs continue to be created than are lost each time. Having stated that, these activation policies to engage with people coming on the live register are a major part of our policy. Facilitators interview them and work with them. During the first two months of this year 9,400 people were referred to FA´ S for interview and to have their details checked to establish whether they would be appropriate for support to enter education, work or enterprise.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: How many of them were appropriate?

Deputy Mary Hanafin: Of that figure, 4,270 were interviewed and not placed, 1,332 remained on the register and the rest, which is more than 3,000, came off the live register.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: Some 50%.

Deputy Mary Hanafin: It shows there is potential. When I entered the Department the first thing I saw was a big sign stating “Interviews for facilitators” on the same floor as the Minister’s office. The Department will employ 30 more to actively engage with these people quickly to enable them to take up other options.

Deputy Olwyn Enright: There is no embargo in the Minister’s Department.

Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.

Adjournment Debate Matters. An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I wish to advise the House of the following matters in respect of which notice has been given under Standing Order 21 and the name of the Member in each case: (1) Deputy Denis Naughten — the need for the Minister for Health and Children to outline her plans for the provision of acute medical and surgical care of the people of Roscommon, Galway, Westmeath, Longford, Leitrim and Offaly, following the HSE decision to close the inpatient surgery and accident departments at Roscommon County Hospital and transfer them to Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, on an interim basis; (2) Deputy Shane McEntee — the Government’s policy on incineration, the different methods by which our waste is disposed of and its possible effect on people’s health; (3) Deputy Jimmy Deenihan — the closure of the Tralee refugee support services drop-in centre; (4) Deputy Fergus O’Dowd — the progress regarding a school in Drogheda, County Louth; (5) Deputy Phil Hogan — to intervene with all employment agencies to support the retention of existing jobs and the replacement of employment at Smithwicks brewery, Kilkenny; (6) Deputy Kieran O’Donnell — the roll-out of BreastCheck in Limerick; (7) Deputy Michael D. Higgins — to ask the Minister for Health and Children to indicate the steps her Department will take on the continuing issue of 278 separated children who entered the country as unaccompanied minors and who have gone missing while under the care of the Health Service Executive; her views on whether the human rights of these children have not been vindicated; and if she is in a position to state that the children involved are not in danger of involvement in circumstances such as the abuses associated with human trafficking; (8) Deputy Joan Burton — the reasons a school in Dublin 15 was refused recognition; (9) Deputy Andrew Doyle — the need for an extension of the single payment scheme deadline, considering the difficulties facing the agricultural community in meeting tomorrow’s closing date, particularly given that there is currently an estimated shortfall of 50,000 applications, with less than 62% applications received to date, noting that 366 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) agricultural planners are reporting unprecedented difficulties in meeting their workload commitments and considering that this year’s application procedure is more complex than previous years as it incorporates the single farm payment, disadvantaged areas payment and REPS; (10) Deputy Joe Costello — the need for the Minister for Health and Children to outline progress to date on the development of the national children’s hospital; and (11) Deputy Joe Carey — the need to address the ongoing boil notice on the public water supply in Ennis, County Clare. The matters raised by Deputies Kieran O’Donnell, Fergus O’Dowd, Joan Burton and Jimmy Deenihan have been selected for discussion.

Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Prior to the adjournment of the debate I was reminiscing about the damage caused by a lie and how reparation can be made. It is no harm to ponder on this for a moment. If grievous and permanent damage is done by a publication to a person’s character, to what extent can this damage be addressed by an apology? There is a thinking in some quarters of the media that an apology should be sufficient to address any hurt or damage done, but I do not accept that. If the damage is of a permanent nature and seriously undermines or takes the character of the person or group concerned, it is immaterial what apology is made as the damage cannot be repaired. If permanent damage is done, there is no way restitution can be made, notwithstanding access to such in the courts. It would be better to carefully think and research before putting into print that which is of a dubious nature. As we all know, such things do not normally find their way into print unless they have been carefully researched and double checked by legal experts. This in no way reduces the possible negative impact on the victim. We spoke previously about various people who have been affected. Previous speakers referred to the Press Council and I spoke about the right of the media to publish. The obligation on the media with regard to publishing information they feel is in the public interest must be weighed against the possible damage to the person involved who might become a victim if the information is incorrect. A situation is developing whereby a print and be damned attitude is unfolding. This is justified by some commentators as the proper route to follow on the basis that it best serves the public interest. I do not accept that either. It is a question of balance. Care and responsibility should be had at all times for the need to make at least a reasonable attempt to print or disclose what is factual. I had this dispute with my erstwhile colleague, the Independent Government backbencher, prior to the adjournment of the debate. I have witnessed the reputation of many people being totally and absolutely unnecessarily damaged over the years without any reparation, which is deplorable. However, activities that took place would not have happened if the media had been able to disclose them. The argument was a newspaper could not go to print because of the danger of being brought to book in the courts. The Press Council should be a useful mechanism for self policing but I am not sure to what extent it can be independent, to what extent media outlets are independent generally or to what extent they are influenced by one another. For example, does it follow that if a media outlet decides to go in a doubtful direction, all the others will follow? The lowest then becomes the common denominator, which is very dangerous. I question the independence of media outlets. Ireland is a small country with a small population where everybody knows everybody else. I wonder whether all media outlets are independent. Are they all influenced by one another? Are they all controlled or directed by the editorial opinion of one outlet? 367 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.]

There are examples of newspapers that come from the same stable and that are in the control of the same trainer having similar opinions on controversial issues, which is worrying. Impartiality and the need to head in the right direction and make a fair decision do not necessarily follow in such an environment, which could be damaging. I could have sued various media outlets over the years, as could the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. The theory was because it was printed, an article had authenticity. What a lot of arrogance. If an article is printed, that does not necessarily make it true. There is an obligation when a story is published, which could have damaging consequences for an individual or family, to verify it and to ensure it contains some semblance of truth. If it is not possible to do so, the media outlet concerned should take a second look at itself and ask what purpose it is serving. Is it merely to sell the brand or to compete with a tabloid? What other purpose does it serve? On the law of averages, Members, who are in a similar position by virtue of the privilege accorded to us by the House and in the courts, should have regard for putting the truth on the record. We should not depart from that, otherwise we demean and lower the standards set for us. I was watching television years ago as a journalist speculated in a way that was not helpful to a series of people. I rang him and asked where he obtained his information. He said it was printed in the press. I said that was remarkable and I asked him whether he checked what happened to those who printed it. He replied he had not, which is amazing. The moral of the story is it is still incumbent on those in the business of making, breaking and publishing news to verify the information and to establish whether it provides a sound basis for the conclusion they have reached. If it does, they can proceed to publish. I refer to a libel case currently before the courts involving a self-confessed criminal who was awarded almost \1 million for being defamed in the press. The case is on appeal and I cannot comment further but that is extraordinary. It will do no harm to ponder these issues as we contemplate the legislation. I hope the standards imposed by the Bill will be fair and honest. I hope they will not deprive the public of information that is in their interest or extend beyond the reach of the individual the right to his or her protection under the law.

Deputy Thomas Byrne: I am glad to contribute to the debate. I would like to acknowledge the presence in the Gallery of the ladies and gentlemen from the Grangegeeth Fianna Fa´il cumann. They are interested in the debate and in the tour of the House and they are welcome.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: It is not in order to refer to the Gallery but I perfectly understand.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: It is quite understandable.

Deputy Thomas Byrne: I apologise but I am only a new Deputy and I will have leeway for a few years. The defamation law, formerly the law of libel and slander, is old and goes back in the mists of time to the common law. It is appropriate that the Legislature updates it to take account of modern practices and to balance the interests of the media and publishers with the interests of the private citizen and those who are being reported on. I am glad the distinction between libel and slander will be abolished under the legislation and it will be merged into the tort of defamation. People knew what libel and slander were but it is difficult to sue for slander because one has to get over an additional hurdle and demonstrate special damage and a personal loss to oneself, except in a number of interesting cases. If a person is slandered about a criminal offence or suffering from a contagious or infectious disease or about one’s business or if a woman is 368 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) slandered about her chastity, he or she does not have to demonstrate a personal loss to himself or herself. These are ancient exceptions, which resulted from cases in the British courts over the centuries, and they have no place in modern society. I am glad the tort of defamation does not require proof of special damage or loss and one can sue whether someone says something about one or prints it in a newspaper without demonstrating loss to oneself other than the loss of reputation, which is difficult to define financially. That is a welcome provision and many law students will be glad of this. This is often a trick question in legal examinations, which serves no purpose to wider society. New procedures will be introduced in the legislation, including the verifying affidavit. A mechanism is provided under section 7 whereby both the plaintiff and the defendant are obliged to verify the particulars of any pleadings they make in the course of a court case. That is a welcome move, which follows from legislation such as the Personal Injuries 4 o’clock Assessment Board Act 2003. If cases are taken in court under this Act, similar affidavits are required. It is important that the plaintiff or the defendant backs up what he or she says by swearing an affidavit and section 7 provides that it is an offence to make a false or misleading affidavit in any material respect. There a number of anomalies in the previous law on libel and slander. One could have multiple court cases against multiple publications. If one was allegedly libelled by a raft of newspapers, one could sue them all, probably sue the printers and possibly sue the distributors. I have just been told that I must take the entire slot so I will do so to the best of my ability.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy has 16 minutes left.

Deputy Thomas Byrne: I might talk a little bit about Grangegeeth if I run out of steam on this. One would have a raft of legal cases and could get damages from each one. Section 10 will provide for a general rule, which is a sensible one, that only one cause of action will lie in respect of multiple publication. The Bill allows a person to bring, with the consent of the court, actions in respect of multiple publications in certain circumstances. I have slight concerns about section 11. I look forward to discussing this Bill in the Oireachtas Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights, of which I am a member. This is a very good committee and we will miss its former Chairman, Deputy Peter Power, who has been promoted to a junior Ministry. When we discuss this Bill, we will address section 11, which allows a body corporate, such as a company or even a Minister, who is a body corporate, to bring a defamation action, regardless of whether the company has suffered financial loss from the alleged defamation. Companies must have rights to sue for defamation where their reputation has been damaged but we cannot have multinationals bullying members of the public like a certain multinational did in the McLibel case, which was a bit heavy-handed. I have seen cases in my constituency involving a legal issue or row where a writ for slander or libel, which is really there to silence people, is issued. I am concerned about the proposals for body corporates. Perhaps there should be some restriction on companies bringing libel actions. There should be some restriction on people bringing actions which are just used to silence people and which are not really part of the main dispute. At the same time, a body corporate needs to be able to defend itself and can incur huge losses if lies are printed about it. It is very important to remember that, by virtue of the Constitution and this Bill, anything we say in this Chamber cannot be taken up in any court proceedings, be they libel, slander, tribunals or cross-examination. I know that the court action brought by Deputy Bertie Ahern in respect of this has been successful in the High Court, which I very much welcome. We can say what we like in here without being worried about being sued for libel or slander but it is a heavy responsibility on us. The Standing Orders of the House provide some regulation in 369 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Thomas Byrne.] respect of that but it is an internal regulation of the House and is not something for which we can be answerable before the courts. Traditionally, there were a number of defences to libel and slander, what we will now call defamation. One of them was known as the defence of justification. This Bill will rename it truth, which it always was. The justification simply meant that something was true so if one said something about someone, one went to court and said that it was true. Of course, one had to prove that it was true. If one did this, there was no case for defamation. It is very sensible that the law of justification, as it was called, is kept but is renamed the truth, which is what it is. Justification is an obsolete word if it ever meant truth. Section 15 deals with absolute privilege. This is where there are circumstances where one can say what one likes without the person concerned having any recourse. Utterances in this House are the subject of absolute privilege. This is guaranteed by the Constitution but is also reiterated in this legislation. Members of the European Parliament have the same privilege, as do members of Da´il committees, although we are often reminded that witnesses coming before the committees do not have the same absolute privilege as members. A judge has absolute privilege in performing his functions in court. That is to be welcomed, is sensible and does not need explanation. The Bill goes on to mention statements made in tribunals. They have absolute privilege but, again, it is incumbent on tribunals to be aware, as they are, of their responsibilities to regulate their use of absolute privilege. That is to be welcomed. An example would be a coroner who has absolute privilege in the course of his verdict or inquiries during an inquest. Absolute privilege will remain. There is no action for defamation; a person can say what they like. It is in the public interest and the public good that a judge or Member of the Oireachtas does not have to worry about being sued. Section 16 gives a statutory basis for qualified privilege. As far as I know, this is a new provision that was developed under court decisions over many years. Qualified privilege means that one has privilege to say something but it is not absolute and can be withdrawn in certain cases. Generally speaking, this covers people who have a duty to receive information. If one reports something to the gardaı´ in good faith, qualified privilege applies. One cannot be sued for it unless, under the old law, one did it with malice, which is different from doing it maliciously. One did it with malice, as legally defined. One could not be sued because it is in the public interest that this be done and that people would go to the gardaı´ before they would think of being sued for reporting a crime or on someone who they believed had done some wrong. The person receiving the information has a duty to receive it, but the person giving it must have an interest in doing so. That is the double requirement. This qualified privilege, where one has a defence to libel and slander and cannot be sued in certain circumstances, is removed if one knew at the time that it was not true. Traditionally, the phrase was that one did it with malice. The Bill goes on to set out in section 17 the different requirements. The fact that they are being set out is welcome. The word “malice” was badly defined and many people did not necessarily know exactly what it meant. It is welcome that the Minister has set out exactly what is required. The plaintiff must prove that the defendant did not believe the statement was true; that the defendant acted out of bad faith, spite, ill will or improper motive; or that the statement bore no relation to the purpose of the defence and so on. It is good that this has been set out very clearly because often these things can be the subject of considerable debate in court. This only adds to legal costs and court actions and makes things less likely to be settled when the law is not set out clearly. It is welcome that this be done. 370 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

A very important provision is section 20 which will allow an offer to make amends. This allows a person who has published a statement that is alleged to be defamatory of another person to make an offer to make amends. This must be in writing, must state what it is and must state what it is talking about, namely, whether the person is retracting the entire statement or is only talking about part of it. An offer to make amends includes things like making a correction, issuing an apology and paying damages and legal costs, if necessary. That is very important because it encourages people to settle these cases where a newspaper has made a genuine mistake and does not want to go down the road of court action. Under current legislation, a plaintiff, someone who has been the victim of defamation, might feel it more worth their while to go to court and not settle if they feel that a jury would be beneficial to them. We know that juries, who are only used in libel and slander cases in the High Court, are very unpredictable. Sometimes they can give massive amounts of money because they value the damage done to the victim, while at other times they can give a decision that makes one wonder how they came to that decision. Decisions on defamation in the High Court are solely the preserve of a jury. They are some of the few cases left where a jury makes a decision in a civil case. In the Circuit Court there is no jury and the decision is made by the judge. The threshold in the Circuit Court, generally, is approximately \38,000. That has been increased for defamation cases to \50,000, which is a nice round figure. This provision may encourage more people to go to the Circuit Court rather than the High Court where, hopefully, the cases can be dealt with expeditiously. However, there are some Circuit Courts in the country where there is an enormous backlog of cases, which is not the fault of the judges. In those circumstances, people might not want to go to the Circuit Court because they could be waiting for some years and might opt instead to have their cases heard in the High Court, which may be quicker. The Bill introduces welcome reform to the area of defamation. Members on all sides of the House will support anything that makes the law less complicated. This legislation has already been examined in the Seanad and will be scrutinised by the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights. The old offences of criminal libel, seditious libel and obscene libel are abolished. I do not believe they have been used in this country for some time although I recall that Ms Mary Whitehouse tried to bring prosecutions for such offences in England over certain publications. If those provisions are not being used by the Director of Public Prosecutions in day-to-day practice and do not relate to modern-day living, it is as well that they are abolished. There is no point in having offences listed on the Statute Book that are not used as it makes a mockery of the law. The limitation period for the initiation of a case is being reduced, which I welcome. Currently the limitation is six years for libel and three years for slander, and this is to be reduced to one year, although in certain cases the court can allow for a longer period. Shorter limitation periods are the way forward. Certainly a victim must be given sufficient time to decide whether to take a case but the old six-year limitation period was too long. A plaintiff could bring proceedings against a defendant five years and ten months after the event, making fair proceedings very difficult. A period of one year is reasonable. Of course, in any defamation action, it was always deemed to be a bad mark against a plaintiff if he or she did not take the action quickly. A judge or jury, in those circumstances, would ask what the plaintiff was doing in the intervening period and wonder why he or she was not worried about his or her reputation or good name. I welcome this Bill, which is one of many items on the desk of the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I hope that the Da´il and the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights works through the Bill as quickly as possible so we can get it on to the Statute Book. The Bill will reduce costs to the court system, to plaintiffs and defendants. 371 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Thomas Byrne.] It will also allow the media some more leeway through the creation of a new defence of honest opinion. This will give newspapers and the media generally a little more freedom, but that carries with it a responsibility which they must exercise judiciously. They must report the news and their opinions, with which we have no problem, but they must respect people’s right to their good name and that of their family. The media have a lot to gain from this Bill in terms of more freedom and less worry but they must give something in return. If they continue to do their job properly, we will continue to support them.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on this long-awaited Bill. The Bill has had a very rocky gestation, going back more than 15 years, for reasons that are well known to the Minister. The arrangements that it now facilitates deserve the opportunity to be monitored in practice to determine how they work out. The Bill before the House is decoupled from the privacy Bill, which had been threatened by the last Government. It settles for an independent press council and press ombudsman, guided by a standard code of practice. However, the recent resignation of Mr. John Horgan from the Press Council, which was referred to during the debate, probably gives some pause for reflection in terms of whether what we have really agreed is an independent press council as distinct from a self-regulating press council. Mr. John Horgan, who is not to be confused with the imminent occupant of the position of Press Ombudsman, is a distinguished former chairman of the Labour Court. Presumably, it is the particular skills and experience gained in that role that caused him to be on the Press Council in the first place. The remarks he has made in public raise some interesting questions and if I have time, I will return to them later. I am bound to say that for the Labour Party, the overriding consideration must be the imperative of a press that is free to inquire, report and comment, subject only to the best values of journalism. Freedom of expression is not something that should be in the gift of politicians. At the same time, however, I agree with the observations of Baroness Onora O’Neill that much of what purports to be journalism is no such thing and seems intended simply to make or increase profits for media owners. Members on all sides of the House will understand what she means by those remarks. In terms of the decision of the previous Government to link this Bill inextricably with the privacy Bill, it appears from a sequence of recent cases in the privacy area that a new jurisprudence is emerging. Perhaps, as legislators, we ought to be prepared to leave that issue to the courts. The question traced by almost everyone I have heard speak to the Bill so far goes back over the emergence of this Bill over such a long period, with the main formative influence being the report of the Law Reform Commission. Obviously the issues involved are sensitive and important for our society. Undoubtedly, opinion has been divided within and outside the House and indeed within the Government. Having regard to that backdrop it is something of an achievement to now have before the House a Bill which after such prolonged argument and consultation has attracted a substantial measure of support from all sides. I do not think anybody disputes the fact that the law as it stands is deficient in a number of respects and that we lag behind best practice. There are widely varying views about the complex issues that are involved in reforming the law. It is interesting to read the programme for Government for 2002 and see the very wary commitment given therein by the parties comprising that Government where they made very plain that the commitment to reform the defamation law was in the context of an accompanying Privacy Bill. The impression given was that that was very carefully framed, that only the simultaneous implementation of a Privacy Bill would bring at least some Ministers on board in terms of the refurbishment of the defamation 372 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) law. Indeed — and this has never been contradicted — some Ministers only came on board on the basis that there would be an accompanying Privacy Bill put to the House. In all fairness, it is probably the case that this view was shared in wider circles than just the Ministers around the Cabinet table who said “No” to the then Minister, Mr. McDowell, when he sought to reform the defamation laws. This was a view which had some sympathy among other of our colleagues here and outside the House. I was struck by the fact that when the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, introduced this Bill, he went out of his way, it seemed to me, to say that he, “wanted the House to note the fact that the Privacy Bill remains on the Seanad Order Paper, having been approved by the Cabinet.” When the Minister comes into the House he will have the opportunity to correct me if I am wrong but the only inference to be taken from this is that the Government reserves the right to revive the Privacy Bill and if it is dissatisfied with the performance of the arrangements put in place by this legislation, to bring that Bill before the House. To some extent, we are in the territory of “suck it and see” with the Bill before us now. I acknowledge that whereas privacy and defamation are indeed connected, they are not the same thing. For example, the broadcast media is governed by its own legislation which places an onus on the broadcasting media to ensure that the privacy of the individual citizen is not unfairly intruded upon. The Constitution gives a right to freedom of expression and, although unenumerated, a right to privacy on the other hand. It must be conceded that in general, Irish newspapers have not aped the worst excesses of the kind of intrusive coverage of personal lives one sees across the water. This is not to say there have not been ominous straws in the wind in recent times in Ireland, motivated, it is alleged, by commercial competition, whereby the tradition of Irish newspapers is coming under challenge. There have been some notorious lapses of taste and gross intrusions into the private lives of citizens. I presume these were considerations in the minds of those Ministers who dissented from the then Minister’s Bill. The overriding consideration must be the imperative of a press free to inquire, report and comment, subject only to the best values of journalism. My colleague in the other House, Senator Alex White, wrote recently, “Freedom of expression is not something that should be in the gift of politicians” and this is something we must accept. I raised earlier the public remarks of John Horgan, former member of the Press Council of Ireland, which gave rise to the question in my head about whether we have now opted for a system of self-regulation, as distinct from independent regulation. It is interesting that this debate started out on the basis of the demand for a statutory press council. The more one examines this proposal, the more I think the correct judgment has been made. It is worth waiting to see how the proposals enabled by this legislation work out in practice. There is a danger that if there were statutory powers the Government of the day, any Government, may be minded on occasion to unreasonably intervene and to give direction. We have embarked on this system. A majority of members of the Press Council of Ireland seem to me to be selected by the industry itself and I wonder if this is a good idea. When we are engaged in the argument about independence versus self-regulation, it would be easier to persuade us of the independence of the regulation if it was clear that a majority had not been selected by the industry. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response to the arguments in his summing up. I would like to hear the Minister’s view on the arguments advanced by John Horgan which he spells out in what seems to be a temperated and considered piece in The Irish Times at the weekend. He argues that if we really are to have openness and transparency then the council should be prepared to publish dissenting judgments. I would like to hear the Minister address that issue. As Mr. Horgan put it, there is no point in holding up the facade of unanimity if there are minority views. Why should they not go into the public domain as well? 373 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.]

Let us take the famous controversy a couple of years ago of the publication of cartoons, deemed to be offensive to the Muslim community. If they were published in this country and if there was a Muslim member of the Press Council, can it reasonably be said there was a unanimous view of the press council to uphold the publication of those cartoons? In all prob- ability the Muslim member might reasonably be expected to object. Is there any reason we should not know of that objection? Is it purely institutional protection that causes the Press Council to want to present the image of unanimity? I think that is a reasonable question, and I do not think it would diminish the Press Council in any way. Rather, it would enhance it. I say that against a background of the only case I know of which concerned a Member of the House. In that instance the Press Council did function. It did its job and the newspaper concerned published, with similar prominence, the apology even though one might argue that, strictly speaking until this legislation was enacted, it was not necessary for it to do so. I acknowledge that fact. Given that we are all required to observe the first national language, as they say tu´ s maith, leath na hoibhre. We can reasonably say that about the decision in that case. Put simply, the first reason the new Defamation Bill is needed is that the law as it stands is too complex and too cumbersome. Obviously, there are other major reasons for reform because there are certain aspects of the current law that are open to criticism on the grounds of failure to comply with international law and constitutional requirements. There is no doubt that cases are expensive and time consuming. Given the cost involved, they are way beyond the reach of ordinary citizens. For participants on both sides, the stakes committed to are enormous. I draw attention to a couple of items in the Bill that I would like to see addressed and on which I would like to hear the Minister’s views. Unlike most areas of civil litigation, defamation law remains dominated by the pleading process and the exchange of written argument between the parties prior to oral hearing. The process is meant to clarify and narrow down the points at issue. In a defamation case, pleading becomes a trap for the unwary. Cases can be won or lost on pleading points. This is all the more reason for the lawyers involved to charge heftier fees than usual. The first purpose of reforming legislation, therefore, should be to ensure that more cases are heard and decided on their merits relatively expeditiously in the most convenient and appropriate venue and at a comparatively affordable price. Two disappointing features of the Bill require examination. First, we should use the opportunity to abolish any and every rule of law or practice in respect of the taxation of costs in defamation actions that provide for the taxation of legal fees in such actions at a rate higher than the rate prevailing in actions in tort generally. At present, as a general rule and without considering the complexity of the particular case, costs in defamation actions are taxed far more than the rate applicable to any other civil action. Second, the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995 lists designated matters in respect of which legal aid may not be granted by the Legal Aid Board. That Act was based on the pre-existing legal aid scheme. The refusal to cover defamation was based on the prim notion that suing for defamation like polo and fox-hunting is an esoteric and expensive pursuit to be contemplated only by those who can afford the cost and that it was far from the libel courts that the poor were reared. That attitude is completely at variance with the constitutional obligation of the State to vindicate the good name of the citizen. Given the constitutional status of the right to one’s good name, this exclusion is unjustifiable and this restriction should be deleted. There are more than enough safeguards in the Act to ensure the Legal Aid Board is not required to fund frivolous or spurious actions.

Deputy Dara Calleary: I wish to share time with Deputy Margaret Conlon. 374 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

An Ceann Comhairle: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Dara Calleary: In discussing the Defamation Bill, the role of the media and of writers in the week that we mourn the passing of Nuala O’Faolain, it is appropriate that we take time out to pay tribute to her and to her writings which would never have attracted the need for this Bill. Her writings were a model for all journalists, being incisive and challenging. Her last outlet in the media, her interview with Marian Finucane some weeks ago, is one that has impacted on the consciousness of Irish people. Were all people to attain the standards of Nuala O’Faolain this Bill would not be needed. That said, the Bill is welcome. In this culture of mass media which seems to grow bigger every day and lose its borders through the Internet and so many other means, the Bill is necessary. Its key features are appropriate because they level the playing field for both sides. I note that under the provisions of the Bill an offer of an apology no longer means an immediate admission of liability which is appropriate. If a paper gets a story wrong, it can offer an apology and publish one without leaving itself open to a weakened defence later in the process. That plaintiffs and defendants need sworn affidavits to be examined in the courts is welcome. These will enable everybody to see what is the issue and where the problems arise. This will allow a proper case to be heard and, hopefully, avoid a lengthy legal process which only adds to the expense. There is also the issue of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest. That is a new defamation defence in Irish law. That defence is fair and welcome and may remedy the potential difficulties being created by the provision of the body corporate in granting the powers of the body corporate on defamation. There is a danger, as Deputy Thomas Byrne outlined, that this could be abused. The matter of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest could evolve into weakening the worst aspects of the body corporate because there is no doubt that large companies and large organisations resort to the legal process and would do so, if this provision opened up to them, in an attempt to quell opposition to plans of developments, plans of growth or opposition to any concerns about product. This new defence in welcome in that area. The creation of the Press Council and the press ombudsman is a welcome development. We have all had Professor John Horgan with us in our parliamentary parties earlier in the year. He is on the road doing the work he needs to do. It is important that his office be resourced properly so as to sell its message around the country. It needs to be on the road and in people’s faces. It needs to outline to people its responsibilities in order that people can engage with the ombudsman in the event of being slighted unfairly. The press ombudsman needs to have a similar presence at various events and gatherings as the Health and Safety Authority and other bodies with a function in protecting personal rights. I also expect Professor Horgan will be given a budget similar in size as the budgets available to these organisations. I hope the apparent difficulties regarding the Press Council are resolved as soon as possible. I refer specifically to the former Minister’s remarks on the occasion of the launch of the Press Council to the effect that sceptics were being served by doubts surrounding the council’s independence. I hope immediate measures are taken to address this issue. The media have evolved significantly in the five years it has taken to bring the legislation before the House. Whereas Ireland has been rather cosseted by a high standard of national and local media, other countries have experienced the development of a mass media market governed by the motto “publish and be damned” and the rule that if a story sells it should be published. As Deputy Rabbitte stated, this approach in which business principles dominate journalism is beginning to creep in here. 375 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Dara Calleary.]

A number of speakers referred to a case taken against a newspaper by a Member of the House. As Deputy Rabbitte noted, the newspaper in question acknowledged its error when it lost the case. Nevertheless, the defence it submitted for the error, namely, that it was within its rights to take the action it did because the individual concerned was a public figure, was breathtaking. This defence was published in the findings of the case. A line is crossed when a person who is gravely ill cannot come home to the comfort of his family without having to worry that people are lurking outside his house to try to take a photograph with a view to selling it to a publication. No one deserves this treatment and it is awful that regulations must be introduced to protect citizens from it. This case shows a deterioration in decency and a lack of respect for the person. Journalists are subject to immense pressure from accountants employed in media organisations. The measure of journalism no longer appears to be awards or other forms of recognition but the number of newspapers sold. Advertising is king and the advertiser rules. Newspapers advertising their product emphasise how many ABC 1 or ABC 2 readers they have and their value to advertisers in terms of product sales. Unfortunately, the standard of writing appears to be secondary to the ability to attract the right kind of reader with the right kind of money who, in turn, will attract the right kind of advertiser. It is unfortunate the media is moving in this direction, although we are fortunate to have journalists who are willing to resist this culture. The Bill sets out to support and maintain high standards. The emphasis of the body corporate provision must be on fair play and free speech. I echo Senator Alex White’s comments in this regard. Decisions by large institutions of all types to engage in new projects, whether an economic programme, a planning proposal or the development of a new product, always invite opposition. In a democracy such institutions must not be able to revert to legislation to try to weaken such opposition. People have a right and duty to stand up for what they believe is right and the new provision should neither assist nor prevent them from performing this duty. The tidying up aspect of the legislation is welcome. I note Deputy Byrne, a relatively recent graduate from law school, had a book of torts with him when he spoke. As a result of this legislation, solicitors around the country will be scurrying to consult their textbooks because the Bill tidies up so many old offences and defences and makes the law relevant to the current media market. The legislation is welcome given the changes in the media environment since 2003. The growth of the Internet and multinational media groups and the emergence of competing newspapers within a newspaper stable delivering different messages to suit different audiences makes it difficult to understand and manage this sector. The Bill is well-meaning and appropriate and I wish it every success.

Deputy Margaret Conlon: I am grateful for an opportunity to speak to this Bill and thank Deputy Dara Calleary for sharing time. While many changes have been introduced in the area of defamation law since the enactment of the 1961 Act, substantial reform of the law on defamation is long overdue. The large number of new forms of media and on-line activity creates potential for an increase in the number of cases of defamation. Further modernisation of this area of law is needed to take into account the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and courts of law in this jurisdiction. The main features of the Bill I propose to highlight include the novel provision requiring a plaintiff and defendant to submit a sworn affidavit showing the veracity of their statements and positions. Furthermore, the requirement that they make themselves available for cross- 376 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) examination will allow the cut and thrust of argument to show the strength of each party’s stance. Many people in public life, including me, have had their good name and character impugned. Public figures and private citizens may fall victim to this problem. Everyone is entitled to a private life. There are no excuses for journalists to go beyond the bounds of their profession to secure a scoop or headline. The Bill provides that if someone is proven to have defamed a person, an apology must be given the same or similar prominence as the original statement. I welcome this innovative measure. How many times have we seen an article on the front page of a newspaper, complete with sensational headlines, in which a person’s character was defamed? In many cases, a subsequent apology appears weeks later in the middle of the newspaper in such small print and under such a minute headline that it is virtually unrecognisable and frequently overlooked. This practice is unfair to the victim. Although the independent Press Council was officially launched on 9 January 2008, it requires the enactment of this legislation to function fully. The code of practice for the print media is also in place. The new body will need to be reviewed and its performance and operation subject to constant monitoring. I am concerned that certain sections of the press and other forms of media have not registered with the Press Council. It is necessary that they do so to prevent the emergence of myriad systems to deal with grievances because this would dilute the efficacy of the Press Council. I recognise the need to have a free press. For this reason, the inclusion in the Bill of a new defence of “fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest” is a welcome step. Journalists digging, investigating and probing have discovered many worthwhile stories over the years. However, it is imperative that all journalists work to the highest professional and ethical standards, engage at all times in accurate reporting and do not base stories on anecdotal evidence and sensational headlines. A further element I welcome is the merging of libel and slander into the tort of defamation. Slander, as Deputy Thomas Byrne, a solicitor, said, is very tough to prove with extra hurdles put in place. Many people are afraid to take a case when a defamatory remark is made against their character for fear of even further damage or the media highlighting the defamatory remark. No one would want further attention drawn to himself or herself. When a court case is taken and an award is made, it goes some way to remedy the damage and alleviate the hurt caused. However, the damage has already been done and the hurt has already been caused to the individual and his or her family. A person’s good name and character is a priceless asset in the workplace and publicly. I hope journalists will exercise greater care to ensure fewer such cases are necessary. Younger people are now possible victims of this new tort of defamation. We hear horror stories of young people being bullied and possibly defamed on social interactive websites such as Bebo and Facebook. The electronic age is well and truly here to stay. We must be able to tackle these new media if they step outside the bounds of what is acceptable because we must be able to protect all our citizens. I mention young, impressionable teenagers. Unfortunately in the past, this type of defamation and bullying has led to disastrous and sometimes fatal consequences. It is also important the print media do not ghettoise certain areas in which hardworking, honest people live. Often people are labelled. Although they try to portray themselves in a positive light through positive and progressive actions, this is often lost to the media. Certain newspapers and radio and television programmes seem to like nothing better than bad news and sensational headlines. Sensational headlines sell newspapers and there is huge pressure on journalists to get the big scoop and the big story and to print the big headline 377 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Margaret Conlon.] because that means more customers and, ultimately, more revenue. There is a need to exercise more caution because the truth must always be to the fore and the defence of truth will always succeed. The area about which I am greatly concerned is the libelling of the dead, which shows a complete lack of respect. There was always a tradition in this country of respecting our dead. Colleagues mentioned the disgusting coverage of the late Liam Lawlor’s death, that of Princess Diana and more recent tragedies. The media were insensitive and extremely hurtful to the families who were subjected to the coverage and comments while they were mourning the death of a loved one and trying to cope with their untimely passing. I welcome this much needed Bill. Reform is certainly needed and for the many reputable journalists who write honourably and deal only with facts, we must ensure that high standard is maintained. We must also ensure all our citizens are protected in a media market which is constantly changing.

Deputy Tom Hayes: I wish to share time with Deputy Jim O’Keeffe. It is good to have the opportunity to speak on the Defamation Bill 2006 but before I do so, I join Deputy Dara Calleary in sympathising with the family of the late Nuala O’Faolain. She was an exceptionally talented journalist and the way she dealt with her illness and went on the airwaves helped many people. I visited somebody in my consistency around the time she spoke about her illness and it had an immense effect. When talking about journalists and the media, we should remember her great courage and the way she accepted her fate in life. Before speaking on issues pertaining to defamation, I ask for clarification for which we, on this side of the House, have been pushing. It is on record for some time that the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is in favour of introducing the Privacy Bill in tandem with this Defa- mation Bill. However, it seems the former Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, was against the idea, as was our party spokesperson on justice, Deputy Charles Flanagan, since we believe the Press Council and the Press Ombudsman together with the Defamation Bill should be given a chance before revisiting the question of privacy legislation. Will the Minister clear up this grey area as to whether we should expect the Privacy Bill to be linked to this one in order that it is not necessary to either hold up this long awaited Bill or rush through the Privacy Bill before the Press Council has had sufficient time to deal with this? As Deputies, it is our job to highlight legislation which may quickly become out of date. If the Privacy Bill was pushed through before the Press Council could give adequate input, it would be a waste of time and taxpayers’ money. There are some provisions in the Bill which mean real improvement to Irish law and which I would like to discuss. The Minister said the Bill puts on a statutory basis a new defence of fair and reasonable publications on a matter of public interest and that this new defence is designed to facilitate responsible journalism, that it is not a charter to engage in casual defamation or character assassination and that it is not a licence for sloppy or vindictive practices by journalists or editors. He said it will be for the courts to decide what credence to give to an editor or a journalist who tries to cloak himself or herself in such a defence without proper regard for this purpose. This seems very positive and I hope the technicalities are sufficiently considered in order that there are no loopholes in the Bill, as often happens in legislation. It is important we tease that out. Section 7 provides that plaintiffs and defendants in a defamation action will be required to submit a sworn affidavit verifying assertions and allegations and to make themselves available for cross-examination. It will be an offence for a person to make a statement in an affidavit which is false or misleading in any material respect. This is an important and necessary development. The situation until now whereby defamation could be claimed without an affidavit from 378 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) a person bringing the case was ridiculous. This is very important to prevent nuisance cases. The affidavit would also be useful in considering damages. I also welcome the development that an offer of an apology will not be construed as an admission of liability. The current legal situation prevents the giving of a speedy apology which, in some cases, could result in a decision not to take court action. Preventing unnecessary court action saves everybody money and means that the courts are free to consider cases of greater impact and importance. That an apology may be offered placating somebody and stopping him or her taking a case is very beneficial. Section 26, which allows a plaintiff to apply for declaratory orders in lieu of damages, is intended to offer a speedy means of redress where a plaintiff only wants it acknowledged that defamation took place. This is an important clause because people often feel aggrieved or offended by defamation and reputations can be damaged by insults, character 5 o’clock assassinations or unfounded rumours reported as fact. Many of those who are defamed are in the public eye and may be more motivated by a desire to clear their name than by monetary compensation. In that regard, I welcome the provision for a speedy resolution through an acceptance of the falseness of a defamation without wasting the courts’ time on financial aspects. In regard to my earlier point on clarifying the different opinions of the current Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and his predecessor, the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, I commend the Press Council on its efforts to establish itself and improve the ordinary person’s understanding of Ireland’s print and broadcast media. The need for fairness has been addressed in regard to newspapers. In a fiercely competitive market, newspapers face significant pressure to retain their share. We should salute the many good journalists and editors of small and large newspapers for the responsibilities they carry to tell the facts. Too often, we read stories that are not completely accurate but the punter believes what he or she reads in the newspaper. I have often been told ridiculous stories which are taken as gospel truth because they were reported in newspapers. The media have a huge responsibility in that regard and should be helped in every possible way. Newspapers are also facing pressure from electronic media, which allow us to download stories from every part of the world to our laptops and BlackBerries. However, a well-written newspaper article remains the best way of learning about world events. Does VAT continue to be imposed on newspapers? In my local authority in Tipperary, the removal of VAT on newspapers was strongly advocated. That should be considered because newspapers have become expensive for ordinary people and, if they are to be able to purchase several different publications, they should be made as cheap as possible.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe: I am delighted to welcome this Bill, although it has been a long time in the making. When I was a law student, the Defamation Act 1961 was regarded as modern legislation and a significant improvement on the previous arrangement but that Act has clearly become very creaky at its edges. As far back as 17 years ago, aspirations for change were expressed in the 1991 Law Reform Commission report. Given that we have not rushed the matter, it is not before time that legislation has been brought before the House. A number of aspects have been teased out in the meantime and we now have a package which I am happy to support. This is a serious issue because freedom of expression is one the most fundamental rights in a democracy. Our freedom of expression is confirmed in Article 40.6.1° of the Constitution, which guarantees liberty for the exercise of certain rights, including the rights of citizens to freely express their convictions and opinions and, by analogy, freedom of the press. There have 379 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Jim O’Keeffe.] been many developments at international level since the Constitution was enacted. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights contains high sounding phrases on the freedom of expression, but these are aspirational rather than justiciable. Similarly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights contains purely aspirational language. We are discussing, therefore, the need to introduce justiciable measures that achieve the correct balance between freedom of expression for the media and the protection of the individual. No right is absolute because a balance is required to prevent abuse. The European Convention on Human Rights dates from 1950 but was only incorporated in domestic law four years ago under Article 10 of the Constitution. I have been involved with the Joint Committee on the Constitution in its examination of Article 40. Various bodies have made submissions and we hope to issue a report on whether changes should be made to the article within the next eight weeks. Constitutional change is a slow process, however, and regardless of the recommendations of our report, it will take time to reflect them in the Constitution. The existing article, even though expressed in archaic language, has been adequate as a constitutional base. However, our domestic law is, quite frankly, a mess and in clear need of reform. Particularly in the aftermath of court judgments awarding significant sums of money in libel cases, calls for reform tend to surface stridently in the media. The starting point for me, however, is the aggrieved individual. The current arrangement for aggrieved individuals under domestic law is not satisfactory. If an individual has a genuine case, he or she must take on the might of one of the newspaper empires. It is worse than David against Goliath; it is like a snail confronting Goliath. One would need to be as rich as Croesus to take on some of these newspapers but very few people are in that position. In addition, it can take up to six years before a case is disposed of. That is entirely unsatisfactory from the point of view of Sea´n and Mary citizen or any other resident of this country. With justification, the media have on occasion raised the flag of reform. Some of the defects in the current legislation are crazy. It defies belief that a newspaper which wants to issue an apology is unable to do so because it would thereby expose its bank balance to an action. That is the most outrageous example, along with the prohibition on a lodgement in court. There was a range of other issues where the media, rightly, were entitled to say this situation was entirely unfair and wrong, even if they were looking at it from a particular perspective. The other aspect of our domestic law that often struck me as crazy was the question of the amounts of awards. It was a lottery. There was the ludicrous situation not long ago when a large award in a major case was appealed to the Supreme Court which sent it back to the High Court on the basis that it was excessive. When the case was reheard, an award three times the original amount was made. Without commenting on the merits of that case, it shows the crazy outcomes that can be achieved when the courts have no facility to clearly specify guidelines on amounts of awards. The basic constitutional structure is being examined and that work will take place in its own time. That is not where the focus of urgency must be but on our domestic law where three issues became connected over time, namely, reform of the defamation laws, the question of a Press Council or Ombudsman and the question of privacy. I have been convinced for a long time of the need to reform our defamation laws. I am all in favour of a change and recognise the need to establish a Press Council and Press Ombudsman. However, I have reservations on the question of rushing any change in our privacy laws. It is not urgent and I am not sure it is necessary. Let us make the changes in our defamation laws and continue with the work started on the Press Council and Press Ombudsman and put aside any changes in the privacy laws. The essential point is getting the balance between preserving the democratic right to freedom 380 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) of expression and ensuring any restrictions are not overly restrictive or open to abuse by any person or organisation, including the State. I am speaking in general terms. I very much support the Bill, although I have no time to go into detail. Some teasing out and tweaking needs to be done on Committee Stage. I am delighted with the operation of the Press Council and that the Press Ombudsman, a respected former Member of this House, has already taken a lead. I am very pleased with his decision on a complaint made by or on behalf of a senior respected Member of this House. I urge the Government to accept that this is not the time to push ahead with changes in the privacy laws. In the light of the European convention and the cases heard before the European Court, including the Princess Caroline of Monaco case, there are adequate protections. Let us not decide now. The Government should put the issue aside, review the situation in five years and see how the system is operating. Meanwhile let us go ahead. God speed the work on the Defamation Bill and that of the Press Council and Press Ombudsman. We will have a good package that will serve the country well for a number of years to come.

Deputy Noel Treacy: Is cu´ is a´thais dom e´ an seans seo a bheith agam cuidiu´ leis an dıóspo´ ireacht seo ar Cheím a Do´ de An Bille um Chlu´ mhilleadh 2006. Treáslaı´m don iar-Aire, An Teachta Brian O´ Luineachaín, agus don Aire nua, An Teachta Diarmuid O´ hEachthairn leis an jab ata´ deánta agus ata´ a´ dheánamh acu. Molaim freisin na hoifigigh ata´ ag comhoibriu´ leo chun an Bille seo a chur faoi bhraíd Pharlaimint na tı´re. Ta´ an Seanad crıóchnaithe leis an dıóspo´ ireacht ar an Bhille seo agus taímid anois a´ phle´ chun cothrom na feínne a thabhairt do ghach eínne, idir daoine aonra agus comhlachtaı´ cumarsaíde, eagartho´ irı´, iriseoirı´ agus eínne eile a bhfuil baint acu leis na meaín. Ta´ dualgas orainn go leír feáchaint chuige go mbeidh cothrom na feínne ar faíl i gco´ naı´.Ta´ dualgas orainn freisin, mar polaiteoirı´, labhairt go cruinn beacht aon uair a bhıónn o´ raíd a´ dheánamh againn, cibe´ an sa Teach no´ taobh amuigh den Teach ata´ muid ag labhairt. Ta´ an dualgas sin ar cheannairı´ polaitiu´ la, ceannairı´ aítiu´ la agus ceannairı´ naísiu´ nta ar fud na tı´re. I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, on his reappointment, with all his colleagues, and wish them well. I congratulate the incoming Taoiseach and the new Govern- ment and wish them well also. We are gathered to consider as colleagues the very important Defamation Bill 2006 which has had a very long gestation period. It is a long Bill of 36 pages with six Parts and two Schedules. In normal standards it would be a medium-sized Bill that has been in gestation for a long time. There has been a huge amount of consultation and a great demand for the Bill over many years. There has been a reluctance — “resentment” is not the word — among the media that we should go down this road to introduce laws to ensure a balance of equity and fairness prevails for all citizens, whether private, public or corporate, in the media industry. We all have serious responsibilities. We are guaranteed freedom of expression under the Constitution which gives us a responsibility in that what we say should be factual, truthful and focused. Since I joined this House 26 years ago, there has been a major change in the number of publications available each day and week and their sources not just on this island, but elsewhere. We have a mass media market and a discerning consumer base, which the media investors see as an opportunity on which to capitalise. They also have to compete with each other and the international broadcasting media to assert their position and hold onto a certain segment of the market to maintain a viable operation. I read the Bill with some interest and have listened to the debate and observed what people have said. This is a very balanced document. It seeks to take account of our archaic laws, modernise our legislation, give protection and an opportunity for correction to media people, 381 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Noel Treacy.] editors, journalists and directors, in that if a person’s character has been assaulted or otherwise, the media body will has a right to apologise without an admission of liability. In the Bill we have been very open in finding a balance that gives an opportunity to those who may have offended to correct the matter. That is as it should be. As the legislation proceeds and as people have rights, they can exercise those rights in the courts. That is important. The freedom and pluralism of the media are also respected in the Lisbon treaty and particularly the Charter of Fundamental Rights. On that basis the Bill is timely. It is also timely as a result of the Press Ombudsman and Press Council being established on 1 January. On the Lisbon treaty, it is important that the freedom and pluralism of the media are respected. We have a market of 500 million people across the European Union. As a politician in this House, I am obliged to consume at least 18 media operations every week when one takes into account the daily newspapers available here, the weekly newspapers that Deputy Burke and I must observe locally and the Sunday newspapers that often tax us after church services. We have to purchase them to see how things are going. We have to consult all these organs for other reasons to ensure we are in touch with our constituents in all kinds of life events. The media have a significant role to play and with that role comes serious responsibilities. If, when I entered politics in this House 26 years ago, a humble backbencher like myself gave a speech of reasonable magnitude and veracity containing good ideas, often the Deputy could find himself or herself on the front page of a national newspaper. No matter what speech one makes today one will hardly find oneself on any page of a newspaper. The entire scene has changed. We have moved to a more sensational type of reportage than the de facto reportage of the sincere contributions of Members of Parliament. That is a pity. As far as I am concerned, we operate here with a collective constitutional capacity to serve our people. We operate here with collective commitment and collective wisdom to do what is best for our country and to implement the best laws possible on behalf of our people. Nobody has a monopoly of wisdom. It is consensual debate that leads to consensual conclusions that eventually will create the best legislative process that will modernise our country and its statutes and ensure we can go forward together serving our people and maintaining a balance in society between that which is right for society and that which is correct within the laws of the land as implemented by the Legislature of which we all are proud to be Members. There is a serious balance in that regard. There is also a serious responsibility, not just on us as politicians, to have our utterances focused and factual in this House. Speaking of that, given our responsibilities as Members of Parliament and the ethics to which we must adhere which we ourselves have legislated for, in the current debate on the Lisbon treaty there are posters on poles around this country giving misleading direction and impacting on our citizens as if the proposals thereon were facts when they are fiction. There is no name of any organisation on them. There is no indication of who printed them. There is no indication of who they represent. This is a matter which we, as legislators, must focus on and we must ensure as we change the laws for ourselves, for our people and for the media that report on the day-to-day happenings of this island and in the world, those who we serve and those that we work for and with, whether they co-operate with us or not, have the right of expression, but with that right of expression comes a commensurate responsibility and the information that they purvey to people should at all times be factual rather than fiction or misleading. It is a pity in the modern world that intelligent, educated, sophisticated people in this island stoop to such practices on a serious matter so important to our country. I warmly welcome the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, to the House and I wish him well in his new office. I am pleased with the changes he 382 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) proposes here. I pay tribute to him and his officials, as well as to his immediate predecessor, the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, who did significant work in this area and who held considerable consultation pertaining to the Bill before us. We have a serious responsibility to modernise our laws. We saw a similar situation arise in the past with the insurance industry, where people could submit claims three, four or five years after an accident when much medical and legal documentation was built up on a file and a major case could be sustained. Large claims were submitted and honoured, and mostly these were agreed on the steps of a court and recorded in the court without being heard there at all. We had to change all that by modernising the laws. I am delighted that such major change is contained in this Bill. In the past one had up to six years to make a claim for damages and the Bill provides for a minimum of a year and a maximum of two years, which is as it should be. If people are not able to make up their minds in the space of a year, the court will decide within the second year whether the matter is grave enough to allow, as proposed in this Bill, a case to be considered outside the 12 month period. That is a balanced and fair provision. I commend the sensible, practical proposals in the Bill in this regard. Like my colleagues and the Minister, I welcome the establishment of the Press Council and the Press Ombudsman. These developments are important and not before their time. I read with interest the statement made by the then Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, at the launch of the Press Council that he felt the rules, regulations and impositions on its members were, perhaps to say the least, light. This legislation is certainly lifting that lightness and making a stronger legal mechanism available to citizens and anybody who feels they have been badly treated. We have reached a new level in this country where McCarthyism seems to be very much in vogue in the media. Some people are guilty by association with certain people, certain situations and certain occasions. That is a pity. In addition, we have reached a position where there is significant invasion of privacy. The new Taoiseach has made a special appeal in that field and I echo that. Particularly as public representatives, we all are public figures. We go before the people and are elected by the people. We understand the ramifications of public office and public service, and we are totally committed. I can confidently state I have never met a politician in any party, elected to this House or outside this House in another chamber or fora, who was not committed and, indeed, who was not imbued with an enthusiasm of service to their people. We all are driven by service to our country, love of nation and service to our people. When one takes our position into account, given that we go before the people, who are the adjudicators and the arbiters of whether we enter the public arena and whether we stay in the public arena when we ask them to give a validation on our position, it is important our families are treated as private citizens. The family in Irish history, in Irish tradition and in the Irish value system is a strong unit. The basis of the success and the fabric of our society has been woven by our commitment to family, to tradition and to that close value system. It is unfair that one should be exposed just because the person is a politician’s wife or husband, son or daughter, brother or sister, niece or nephew, or uncle or aunt. That should not be alluded to in situations where such persons find themselves in the public arena in their own right. There should be no reason whatever to exploit the fact that these are linked to political persons. It is unfair. It is something that has happened far too often of late. I am pleased too that in the Bill the Minister has allowed judges in court to give a direction to juries in particular situations. That is an important provision. We have eminent judges. They are protected within the Constitution. We, as parliamentarians, have a clear role. The Executive 383 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Noel Treacy.] has a clear role under the Constitution. The Judiciary has a separate role under the Consti- tution. I am pleased with the proposal within the Bill that juries can get direction from the eminent judges of the day. I commend the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, who this week, after coming into office, approved the removal of the upper age limit for jury service. There are senior citizens who have given significant service to this country. Many of them are mentally and physically fit. They all are committed to the country but many, in particular after retirement, want to make a special and unique contribution to the evolution and progress of our nation. It is important that their expertise, experience and wise council is available to the Judiciary and the courts of our land, particularly in the jury system. These eminent citizens, who have gone through life experiences as parents, as leaders in society, as workers who have built up a nation, or as heads of families or within families or in other vocations or careers, who have certain expertise and knowledge and who are able to make an assessment of how the country has evolved and what is good for society at a time, can bring a balance of their own youthful experiences, mature adult experiences, working experiences and retired experiences in a calm fashion to ensuring conclusions in law fair to all sides are reached. I commend the Minister on having lifted the age limit on jury service, allowing people over 65 to serve on a jury if they so wish. We live in times of instant communication via the mass media. These are big challenges for society. We have a responsibility to make sure that there is a balance within society and that consumerism and mass media communication do not direct the pace of a nation or erode the values of our country. It is important that we ensure that the laws we enact, the decisions we take and the utterances we make are relevant, factual and focused. We have a responsibility to maintain that balance in society and to take into account the speed of modern telecommunications and their impact on all members of society, be they young children, elderly people or anyone in between. I recently listened to a debate on the future of the communications industry, especially the written media. It is predicted that over the next 25 years there will be a major reduction in the amount of printed newspapers. With the explosion in modern communications, we may be able to get all information on our iPod or mobile phone and we will not have to read newspapers. That will be a sad day. Newspapers embody the old adage of verbum scriptum stat, or the written word remains. It is important to recognise this when debating the Bill, and it is also important for media organs to recognise that the written word remains. Once written, it stays. If an individual has been damaged by that written word, then there is a serious responsibility to ensure that the perpetrator of that unfounded or unsubstantiated allegation rectifies it by way of an immediate apology.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brian O’Shea): Ta´ no´ ime´ad amha´in fa´gtha agat.

Deputy Noel Treacy: That is disappointing, to say the least. I was just getting my second wind. It is said that in future there may be only one main newspaper on the island of Ireland. That would be a sad day. Whether it is in politics, sports, business or media, it is important that competition exists. Competition is good for everybody. It provides balance and results in new opportunities and fresh dimensions. It would be sad if we were to lose responsible newspapers that have served our country with such distinction. I wish the Minister every success in office. I commend him and his officials on the work that is being done. I am pleased with what is proposed in this Bill. I hope that the new office of the Press Ombudsman can discharge its obligations in a solid, transparent and sustainable fashion. I commend it on its recent decision. I also commend all those people who made a contribution 384 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) to ensure that this vital Bill is being enacted. I salute everybody involved and I wish the Bill a rapid passage through Da´il E´ ireann.

Deputy Ulick Burke: Before dealing with this Bill, I would like to refer to an Adjournment item from a fortnight ago, in which it seems that something I mentioned identified an individual that I did not name. In the interests of fair play, I must say that it was never intended that any individual person should have been identified by the comments on that occasion. I welcome the Minister to the House and I wish him well in his difficult new portfolio. I welcome the opportunity to contribute to debate on this Bill in some small way. The law on libel needs to be updated. We are all conscious of the need for freedom of the press. There has been fantastic investigative work done in the past, despite the restrictions that exist under current legislation, by various journalists in the print and other media. Were it not for the great endeavours of those journalists, there would be many issues that would not have entered the public domain. Hopefully, this Bill will allow for a continuation of important, investigative journalism, but also an expansion of that aspect of it. It is vital that we emphasise at all times the importance of a free press and of fair comment in the public interest. People are entitled to their good name and to balanced reporting. It is also important that people cannot hide behind the law where there is obvious wrongdoing. This Bill must take on board the issue of privacy in tandem with that. We all know of situations where individuals have suffered sever repercussions from statements in the press. There have been many instances of unfair comment. The former Minister, Ma´ire Geoghegan Quinn, felt that it was necessary to resign as a result of comments that were very intrusive on her family. Such a case should not arise again. Sports people such as Paul McGrath literally served time in hell enduring elements of the press. The hurler DJ Carey suffered similarly. I remember reading the press reports on aspects of his life that were terribly unfair to him and those connected to him. If this Bill is to change the outdated 1961 legislation, it is important that instances such as these do not occur. Section 18 updates the defence of fair comment, which becomes the defence of honest opinion. This is an important section which affords the press an important defence against allegations of defamation. It states: “It shall be a defence (to be known, and in this Act referred to, as the “defence of honest opinion”) to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that, in the case of a statement consisting of an opinion, the opinion was honestly held”. Section 24 goes further and provides for a defence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public importance. On the face of it, it sounds reasonable but it gives the press qualified privilege in printing false information and stories not based on fact. It states:

Subject to subsection (4), it shall be a defence (to be known, and in this section referred to, as “the defence of fair and reasonable publication”) to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that the statement in respect of which the action was brought was published—

(a) in good faith, and

(b) in the course of, or for the purposes of, the discussion of a subject of public importance, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and in all the circumstances of the case, it was fair and reasonable to publish the statement.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the court shall, in determining whether it was fair and reasonable to publish the statement concerned, take into account such matters as the court considers relevant, including any or all of the following: 385 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Ulick Burke.]

(a) the extent to which the statement concerned refers to the performance by the person of his or her public functions;

(b) the seriousness of any allegations made in the statement;

Those are two sections that must be dealt with because they give licence to the press that it has not had and they need amendment or modification. I am not satisfied that the Press Council, together with the Press Ombudsman, has sufficient power to ensure the licence is not abused. Since sanctions are not provided for, they will not act as great a deterrent as an award of damages in court. In introducing the new defence we are adopting the law that decided the Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Limited and Jameel and others v. Wall Street Journal Europe cases in which there was a split decision. These legal principles are under examination by the Supreme Court in Ireland and it may be preferable to await the outcome of that case before jumping in with crude amendments to this legislation. We may have no confidence that newspapers will not adopt this provision as cover for their existing practices. There is a constitutional right to freedom of expression and it is important to have a free press in any democracy. It was stated in Dun & Bradstreet Inc v. Greenmoss Builders in the United States that there was no constitutional value in the false statement of fact. It is important that the Minister take this point on board and provide safeguards in the public interest. The Press Ombudsman and the Press Council were established since the beginning of the year and everyone in Ireland has access to an independent press complaints mechanism that is quick, fair and free. These words are important from the experiences with which we are familiar in years past. The new complaints mechanism is designed to ensure the freedom of the press is never abused and the public interest is always served. There are many principles of independent press regulation all over the world. The objectives of the Press Council and the Press Ombuds- man are to provide the public with an independent forum to resolve complaints about the press quickly, fairly and free of charge and to maintain the highest standards of journalism and journalistic ethics. Competitiveness in the media world, including between journalists in a competitive profession, leads to elements of the media making outrageous comments. As the stories roll, one would imagine that the comments were more outrageous in order to gain commercially. The media see it as a need for sales of a journal. Ireland has benefited from the high professional standards of journalism in the main. During the years, inside and outside the House, we have honoured many of the great Irish journalists. Long may this continue. However, if there is an outside influence that dictates standards and requirements, resulting in deterioration of those standards, the profession of journalism will be the loser. That would be a pity for the many fine individuals who have graced the position of journalist in this House and the other aspects of journalism dealt with in Irish newspapers. Deputy Treacy referred to the importance of having more than one voice. In certain instances in the past editors or owners dictated the slant on various issues. Some were unfair to individual politicians, Ministers or parties. So be it but where there is an element of unfairness recognised by the public and the best interests of the public have not been represented, we hope this Bill will give an opportunity to an individual — whether the individual concerned or an outsider — to refer the matter to the Press Council and the Press Ombudsman for decision. The importance of the Bill lies in there being a quick and fair response. It is important that we see those principles reflected in the objectives of the Press Council and the Press Ombudsman. We must 386 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) have confidence in the 13 members who will make up the Press Council. The council must be seen to be at all times fair in addressing the difficulties that arise. The first principle is truth and accuracy in information. Very often, there are elements of inaccuracy in reporting and we do not get the whole truth. It is important significant inaccurac- ies and misleading statements in reports and distortion of pictures in articles published are corrected promptly with due prominence. In the past, apologies from the print media or on television or radio have not been given due prominence. While apologies are these days given prominence, in the past they were often small, one or two-line paragraphs in an isolated part of the newspaper not necessarily within the news section. The Bill provides that, when appropriate, a retention, apology, clarification, explanation or response shall be published promptly and with due prominence. The next principle is distinguishing fact from comment. Comment, conjecture, rumour or unconfirmed reports shall not be reported as if they were fact. However, newspapers and periodicals are entitled to advocate strongly their own views on topics. We have had many examples of this in the past month or two in respect of tragic cases of one kind or another. The reporting of comment, conjecture, rumour or unconfirmed reports can have serious consequences. In a particular case that comes to mind, reckless reporting by the media led to the death of a person. It was sensationalism carried too far. I mentioned that newspapers must strive at all times to be fair and honest. Privacy is a personal right under the Irish Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights as incorporated into Irish law. I outlined at the outset an example of the invasion of privacy and the consequences it had for one of our colleagues. This should not be allowed to happen. It is hoped that many of the provisions in current legislation will be deleted following enactment of this Bill. It is important we support the Bill and, where necessary, amend it in the interests of fairness.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: Ba mhaith liom comhghairdeas a dhe´anamh leis an Aire Dlı´ agus Cirt, Comhionannais agus Athcho´ irithe Dlı´, Deputy Dermot Ahern. Ta´ me´ cinnte go nde´an- faidh se´ jab sa´r mhaith san oifig sin. I take this opportunity to wish Deputy Dermot Ahern every success in his new post as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I have no doubt that, being a solicitor, he has a tremendous knowledge of the law and will be an outstanding success in the position. Like Deputy Noel Treacy, I too congratulate the Minister on the removal of the upper age limit for jury service, which was long overdue. The Minister can take satisfaction from that announcement. I welcome reform of the 1961 Act which, like other speakers, I believe is long overdue. The main purpose of the Bill is to introduce a modern statutory framework to deal with defamation law and to replace antiquated legislation. Another purpose is to provide a victim of defamation with a better sense of his or her rights under the law. The new forms of remedy for those seeking speedy redress when they have been defamed are to be welcomed. The proposed law will also assist publishers in avoiding making or printing defamatory statements. Following a long gestation period, during which time the Bill was widely discussed by the Law Reform Commission, many worthwhile provisions have been incorporated into the legislation. The right to free speech is important. Equally, the right to free press is important. However, there are caveats and I hope these issues can be addressed in the Bill. I welcome the fact that plaintiffs and defendants in a defamation action must submit sworn affidavits verifying their assertions and allegations and must make themselves available for cross-examination. I do not believe the previous situation worked whereby statements could 387 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Michael Kennedy.] be made and it would take years for them to be addressed either through the courts or by way of apology. I welcome section 7 which deals with this aspect. In many cases an apology can assist in avoiding court action. The insistence that in giving an apology the same prominence be afforded to it as was given to the original defamation statement will help to defuse many grievances. Not construing this as an admission of liability is essential from the publishing perspective. Section 22 deals with that aspect. I 6 o’clock welcome also the fact that a defendant in defamation proceedings may, in future, lodge a sum of money into court. This has worked particularly well in other court cases and will, I believe, assist in reducing the number of court cases. It will allow plaintiffs a better understanding of where their case may be going. Section 24 deals with publications using the “matter of public interest” as a defence. While I accept fair and reasonable comment is fine, there have been slippages in this regard by certain publications in recent years. I refer in this regard to overseas publications and, in particular, British publications whose banner headlines have resulted in court actions. It goes without saying that everyone is entitled to their good name. In this respect, the Press Council and Press Ombudsman are welcome developments. I believe that publishers who have membership of the Press Council will adhere to its code of practice, which is essential. However, we must ensure that publications which do not become members of the Press Council adopt the same attitude and fairness, particularly when it comes to legal defence. Section 38 deals with the limit on Circuit Court cases and it is particularly welcome that the sum has increased from \38,000 to \58,000. This will help to reduce the number of High Court actions and the trauma suffered by defendants and their families through involvement in long High Court cases. It will bring also bring about a reduction in fees. The amalgamation of the torts of libel and slander into a single defamation Bill is welcome. My colleague, Deputy Thomas Byrne, alluded to the fact that proving slander is particularly difficult in court. I am sure we have all heard of instances of people alleging slander but not being able to prove it in court. As other speakers stated, one’s good name is important and bringing the torts together in one Bill is welcome. I wish to comment on what I term “insensitive” headlines and stories in publications. Often, these stories deal with deceased people. As many speakers stated, dead people cannot speak for themselves. Reference was made to the late Liam Lawlor, who was a Member of this House. Immediately after he was killed, a story was written about the circumstances of his death which was totally without foundation. If the story were true, I feel printing it after his burial would have been appropriate. However, it was written without any regard to the man’s spouse and family. Grieving families have enough difficulties without having to read banner headlines in the newspapers, particularly when they are untrue. If they do contain the truth, the story will still be good in a weeks’ time when the person has been interred and given a normal Christian burial. More and more we see during the immediate period after death reporters delving in and seeking a story. We understand the competition in the business and that each reporter is competing with his or her colleagues within a publication and that publications also compete with each other. It is all about selling newspapers and numbers for advertising purposes. However, where families are involved, a moral obligation exists for editors to ensure the headlines do not make it any worse for grieving families and to tone down what their reporters may write. 388 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

A recent tragedy in Wexford involved a father allegedly killing his wife and children. Prior to the burials taking place, journalists delved into theories on how and when the deaths occurred. Families have the right to grieve and bury their dead without having to deal with this. In this case, one journalist tried to piece together what had happened, suggesting the young son had not been suffocated in the bedroom but had incurred a shotgun injury. This was completely untrue. Two families were involved and going through a major grieving process. It was particularly bad that either family had to read this material. Of course editors want stories, and this was a major story. Whatever we can do within the Bill with regard to the legalities is one thing. However, on the moral issue, I make a plea to editors to be more responsible. Through a connection, I am aware of the trauma caused to one of the families involved. It was extremely difficult for the family to grieve while reading theories of how the deaths occurred. The recent story involving a GAA man in Waterford was valid in terms of events prior to his death. However, a couple of hours after he took his own life, gory details were published. This man had a son and other family members. The story would not have been any less valid a day after his burial. I find it extremely sad that our newspaper publishers would resort to printing the story before the man was buried. We always felt the British tabloids went for banner headlines and speakers mentioned Princess Diana and others. This is their style. I thought we had honourable traditions in Ireland and I appeal to publishers to reflect on this and to follow up on stories later. Deputy Ulick Burke raised the matter of the Kilkenny hurler, DJ Carey. It is no business of the press if his marriage split up. It happens to many people. My second problem with the story was its timing. The story was released on the morning of the All-Ireland final, when DJ Carey was captain of Kilkenny. Fortunately for him, he led his team to victory. If the story was a good story, it would have held until the Monday or Tuesday. To print it on the morning of the match, when the man was going out to play the most important game of his career, was an outrageous invasion of the privacy of a sportsman respected the length and breadth of Ireland who had given so much to his county, club and the game of hurling. I do not know why the story had to appear that morning. I do not believe the publication sold any more papers because DJ Carey was on the front page. The story would have been equally good on the following Sunday if the publication felt it would increase its sales figures. We, the Irish people, should try to get this message across. Everyone wants to read good stories and obtain the inside information. The timing of stories is particularly important. In another case, the son of a man convicted of murder ten or 12 years ago appeared in a publication because a story evolved about the potential release of the prisoner. The son was a child when the conviction took place. What association did he have with the conviction? It is absolutely outrageous that this young person was subjected to whatever by his classmates in college because he was the son of a convicted person. I cannot understand how editors can stand over this. I accept newspapers compete against each other and they want to increase their ABC readership to secure advertising and so on. When politicians are the subject negative stories, why must newspapers go after their spouses and children, who are not involved? I have a friend who works as a photographer for a British tabloid. On one occasion, a high profile individual was the subject of a media story and he was told to camp outside his house and to get pictures no matter what. This meant he had to approach the windows of the house snapping in the hope he would get a picture. It did not make a difference if the subject’s spouse or children were in it because the newspaper wanted a picture. Freedom of the press has gone too far. The newspaper was entitled to take pictures of the individual at the centre of the story, but why should his family members be dragged in? Why should the newspaper invade his 389 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Michael Kennedy.] home? Why should the photographer be encouraged by his employers to go up to windows taking photographs in a version of pot luck to see what he could get? If that is not an invasion of privacy, I do not know what is. Irish journalism needs to return to standards of basic fairness. Reporters should do their work professionally without invading privacy. I refer to coverage of tribunals. Many of those who are the subject of their proceedings are deceased. I have read headlines in the newspapers, one of which concerned a Fine Gael council- lor who was allegedly offered £250,000. This was not proven but the man was found guilty by the media. No consideration was given to the fact that the tribunal had not issued findings regarding him or others, yet his family had to endure significant publicity because of the allegation. I met the man’s son who said his mother’s life was not worth living. She could not leave the house because of the alleged shame. Let us have good journalism with decent standards.

Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh: Ba mhaith liom comhghairdeas a ghabhaíl leis an Aire as an phost nua ata´ aige agus ta´ su´ il agam go n-eíreoidh go maith linn ag an coiste agus nach mbeidh raic eadrainn go ro´ -mhinic. Ba mhaith liom freisin mo bhuıóchas a ghabhaíl as an deis deíleaíl leis an reachtaıócht ta´bhachtach seo. Ta´ su´ il agam nach mbeidh raic eadrainn faoi, ach ta´ se´ thar am don athru´ seo. In ainneoin an meíd a bheidh a´ ra´ agam amach anseo, measaim gur reachtaıócht maith ata´ ann. Taímid ag deíleaíl anseo le ha´bhair ta´bhachtacha, clu´ mhilleadh agus ionsaithe o´ na meaín ar dhaoine thar na blianta. Taímid ag feitheamh leis an reachtaıócht seo le fada agus, mar sin, deánfaidh me´ iarracht moltaı´ dearfacha a chur chun cinn a bheidh muid in ann a phle´ ar Cheím an Choiste. Irish media markets may appear to be highly competitive because consumers have a daily choice of not only domestic newspaper titles and radio and television stations, but also British, American and other international outlets in every town, village and city. However, the vast array of choice we have cannot hide the fact that control of these media outlets is in the hands of a few people and that number is reducing. New media start ups do not emerge very often because they need hundreds of millions to bankroll them if they are to have any success on entering the market. Domestic media outlets, whether they are local newspapers or radio stations or Internet sites, have never been more valuable and sought after. They are increasingly owned by a small cabal of media conglomerates. Key players in the domestic market include the Independent News and Media group, Communicorp and Liberty Global. INM owns the Irish Independent, Sunday Independent, Evening Herald, 50% of the Irish Daily Star, Sunday World, Star on Sunday, Sunday Tribune, Herald AM and a number of local newspapers. The company’s 50% ownership with the British Express newspaper company gives it a stranglehold with Easons on the distribution of newspapers and magazines in Dublin. Communicorp is one of Denis O’Brien’s significant media and telecommunications vehicles. In Ireland, the company owns Newstalk, Today FM, 98 FM, Spin FM, a substantial share of Spin South West and, in 2007, it spent \200 million on Today FM, Highland Radio and FM104. The latter two stations have since been sold because the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland would not allow Mr. O’Brien to own another music station in Dublin. He also recently became a substantial shareholder in the INM group. Liberty Global is a large conglomerate and the parent company of UPC, which has a monopoly on cable television services through its ownership of NTL and Chorus, which serve more than 500,000 homes. It is dangerous for so few to control so many media outlets and this does nothing to reflect the diversity of views, interests and cultures in Ireland today. However, the role of these media must be examined. A number of media have been blatantly misused by their owners to pursue vehemently an anti-republican agenda, making carefully 390 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) phrased and frequently groundless allegations against Sinn Feín elected representatives, including myself, and supporters without any substantiation. To date, no effective mechanism has been provided to hold the media to account for this. They can act in the comforting knowledge that the cost of seeking justice through the courts is prohibitively expensive for ordinary people. In addition, in the case of elected representatives, who have been put in office by the voting public and who are dedicated to representing their constituents as they have been mandated to, the media are all too aware that the risk of bankruptcy, which would prohibit representatives from holding public office, is too great to take. It is a risk we should not have to take. Sinn Feín believes, as stated in our 2002 election manifesto, that the operation of the media should be as much in the public domain and under as much public scrutiny as the media demand of other bodies and institutions. Self-regulation alone does not work. No industry or profession should be left to regulate itself. Some would say that the media is distinct from other sectors in that its role is crucial to the functioning of democracy, which is correct, but so too are the roles of the Judiciary and the legal profession, both of which must not be left to regulate themselves. A Press Council was established last year, along with a Press Ombudsman. We welcomed it at the time but said that it did not go far enough. The Defamation Bill 2006 provides for statutory recognition of this body. The Bill as drafted merely provides for the recognition of a press council and the entire system is entirely voluntary on the part of the media. The minimum standard for composition of a recognisable press council contained in the Bill is also flawed, allowing for five directors representing the interests of media owners but only one representing the interests of journalists. The concept is based on the flawed British model, which has failed to stem declining standards of journalism and media publications in Great Britain. One member of the Press Council, the former chairman of the Labour Court, Professor John Horgan, has already resigned from his position citing the refusal of the council to publish dissenting judgments as his reason. Its refusal will diminish public confidence in the system in its infancy and confirm concerns that the media cannot be left to regulate itself. In our view, the Press Council should have statutory powers and mandatory media membership. It should establish and enforce a code of standards. Such a code should also have regard for the needs of small publishers, not just large conglomerates. Its decisions should have binding effect. It should be composed of seven independent public interest directors, three directors representing the interests of media owners and three directors representing the interests of journalists. Large media groups should be prohibited from having more than one director each and composition should also ensure the representation of the various media types. This council should be required to publish annual reports covering important topics such as the findings of the complaints procedure, balance in reporting and coverage or other matters as directed by the Minister or the Oireachtas, as is the case with various other ombudspersons. Nı´l gach rud sa Bhille seo go dona, in ainneoin an liosta fada ata´ luaite agam agus na heílimh a rinne me´ maidir leis an chomhairle agus na meaín. Mar a du´ irt me´ cheana, cuirim faílte roimh an Bille agus roimh an deis deíleaíl leis. Ta´ su´ il agam go mbeidh muid in ann deíleaíl ar Cheím an Choiste leis na gneíthe dearfacha de chomh maith leis na gneíthe diu´ ltacha de. Ta´ an reachtaıócht ata´ againn fe´ la´thair dı´rithe i bhfa´bhar siu´ d ata´ in ann ca´sanna a tho´ gaint i gcoinne na meaín. Nı´ co´ ir go mbeadh an reachtaıócht go hiomlań ar an dtaobh sin. Ta´ cosaint sa reachtaıócht nua do na meaín, cosaint ar mhaithe leo feín nuair a foilsı´tear sceálta ina bhfuil speís ag an pobal. Among other things, the proposed new legislation provides the press with a broad new public interest defence against defamation claims, namely, a defence of “fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public importance”. Generally, this new defence would introduce a 391 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh.] better balance between the protection of press freedoms and the rights of individuals. In addition, on the side of individual rights, the new law would be “actionable without proof of special damage”. “Special damages” are damages that are capable of substantially exact calculation, that is, loss of earnings, medical expenses, etc. In the current situation, special damages must be proved to successfully take a slander case. However, in reality, the impact on a person who has been publicly defamed may not be financial at all. Such persons should not be excluded from seeking a remedy so this provision enhances access to justice. A “member of a class of persons affected” will now be able to take a case where the defamatory statement could reasonably be understood to refer to the member concerned. This is important to overcome defamation through tactical reporting. For example, an article that switches from sentence to sentence between an individual’s name and an organisation’s name clearly has the effect of defaming the individual in the mind of the reader without technically doing so under the current law. Under the new legislation, the chance of legal recourse in such situations will be increased, which is why I welcome this change in the legislation. It closes a loophole which journalists have used to associate people in articles where no association is proven or where no association exists. In addition, an offer of an apology will not be construed later by the court as an admission of liability. Currently, newspapers will usually not apologise even when they know they are in the wrong for fear it will be legally prejudicial. However, sometimes an apology is the most appropriate remedy and even more appropriate than payment of damages. This provision should open the way for the more frequent use of public apologies. On this aspect, I hope that it will not be a begrudging public apology and that any time an apology is extracted from the newspaper or media outlet, it will not buried down in the corner on page 20 or broadcast in the middle of the night when nobody is listening. The apology should be given the same prominence as the article that defamed the person in question. Finally and significantly, this legislation provides for statutory recognition of the Press Council to regulate the industry. However, as I have already indicated, there is much room for improvement. While the Bill in general is supportable, it also contains crucial shortfalls, some of which I will now outline. I have already hinted at one shortfall, an costas toirmisceach cas a ghlacadh or the prohibitive costs of making a claim. Nı´l bheidh iad siu´ daradeántar clu´ mhilleadh in ann cheartas nıós eásca a fhaíl. Nı´ gheobhaidh ionadaı´ tofa cu´ namh dlı´,no´ aon cosaint, i gcoinne feímheacht, mar a luaigh me´ cheana. Ta´ cosc orthu siu´ d ata´ feímheach bheith ina oifigigh phoiblı´.Da´ bhrı´ sin, beidh na daoine ata´ tofa go dtı´ an Teach seo, an Seanad no aon oifig phoiblı´ i mbaol ma´ dheánann siad iarracht ca´s clu´ mhilleadh a tho´ gaint i gcoinne na meaín. Maraleírigh me´ cheana, ta´ go leor airgead ag na gno´ thaı´ ollmho´ ra sin. Ta´ go leor airgead taobh thiar de na meaín. Measaim go bhfuil teip sa Bhille os rud e´ nach leagann se´ amach co´ ras inar feídir le daoine ar a ndeántar clu´ mhilleadh teacht ar leigheas no´ cu´ namh dhleathach. The defence of truth under section 14 is flawed. Where some of the words are lies but some are true, “if the words not proved to be true do not materially injure the plaintiff’s reputation”, the publisher still gets away with it. Due to the fact that it may still be difficult to prove the material damage done to one’s reputation, this provision as drafted still allows the publication of statements that are false without remedy. The “defence of qualified privilege” under section 17 protects people relaying incorrect information as long as it is relayed in good faith to a person with a legitimate interest in receiving it, namely, making a child protection report to the gardaı´ or a social worker. The Law Reform Commission has recommended that this defence be limited by some objective criteria. We need to look at what these objective criteria are and how we introduce them into the Bill as it 392 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) progresses through the Houses. For example, they should also require that a reasonable person would have believed the recipient to have an interest or duty to receive the information. To avail of the new defence of fair and reasonable publication, the defendant must only prove that “at the time of publication he or she believed the statement to be true”. This defence, as drafted, is wholly subjective and, therefore, should also be qualified to provide that in the eyes of a reasonable person, it could also be believed to be true. In addition, despite claims to the contrary, this defence is not dependent on compliance with Press Council or equivalent standards. Hearsay evidence can also limit damages. Under section 29, those adjudicating damages will have regard to unlimited evidence concerning the reputation of the plaintiff which, in civil courts, can also include hearsay. This provides for a framework of discrimination and will deter many people who have a legitimate defamation claim from taking action. That issue must be addressed. Sinn Feín fully supports the right to information and freedom of the press as basic cornerstones of our democracy. We are opposed to censorship, media monopoly and abuse of the press by vested interests through the publication of biased or false information on individuals and groups. In keeping with this, we believe that the media industry should be fairly regulated and be accountable in the public interest, much as the media already demands of others. I wish to give an extremely qualified welcome to the Bill and indicate my party’s intention to propose amendments to it on Committee Stage. Measaim go bhfuil ga´ le Bille nıós foirfe. Deílea´lann an Bille seo le ceisteanna ta´bhachtacha agus beidh orainn teacht ar ais chucu ar na Ceímeanna eile ionas go mbeidh muid a´balta deánamh cinnte de go mbeidh deis ag na daoine ar a ndeántar clu´ mhilleadh ca´s a tho´ gaint agus an clu´ sin a fhaíl ar ais, fiu´ ma´ deánadh an clu´ mhilleadh sin le no´ gan mailı´s. Is ga´ go dtuigfidh na meaín go bhfuil dualgais orthu chomh maith o´ thaobh na saoirsı´ ata´ acu, gan mı´-u´ saíd a bhaint astu. Ta´ dualgais orthu freisin, de thairbhe na saoirsı´ daonlathacha sin, an fhı´rinne a chur i gclo´ gan clu´ mhilleadh a dheánamh no´ gan clu´ duine ar bith a scrios d’aonghno´ . Aon uair a milltear clu´ an duine d’aonghno´ ,ta´ se´ deacair an clu´ a tharrthaíl arı´s. Nı´ leor leithsceál gearr i gcu´ inne leathanaigh sa phaípeár, na´ nı´ leor ca´s clu´ mhillte a bhuachaint. Go minic, i ndiaidh an chlu´ mhillte teipeann ar slaínte an duine agus ar a ghno´ . Go minic freisin to´ gann se´ tamall fada le teacht slań uaidh. Molaim an Bille agus ta´ su´ il agam go mbeidh Bille nıós foirfe againn amach anseo nuair a bheidh muid crıóch- naithe leis sa Teach seo.

Deputy Peter Kelly: I wish to share time with Deputy Mattie McGrath. I congratulate the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, who will continue the excellent high standards that he has brought to the other port- folios he has held. I wish him, his officials and the Garda Sı´ocha´na every success in their work on behalf of the people. I have every confidence that the Minister will do himself, his constituents and the people proud. This Bill provides for the reform of the law relating to defamation and will replace the current legislation which dates back to 1961. It is important because it concerns the very essence of a democracy, namely, the right to freely communicate facts, opinions and comment. Any change in this area must be carefully thought through in all its implications. We cannot afford to get this wrong which is why the formulation and implementation of this Bill has been such a long and detailed process. The need for reform was set out in the programme for Government and, since then, the Bill has been subject to a great deal of reflection and consultation. In that context, I congratulate the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Brian Lenihan, who 393 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Peter Kelly.] engaged in a lengthy and thorough debate and consultation with our colleagues in Seanad E´ ireann. This consultation has resulted in some further improvements to the Bill, upon which I will expand later. The contribution of the former Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, was acknowledged by all sides of the House, most particularly by Senators Joe O’Toole and Eug- ene Regan. The Bill takes into consideration recent case law and is designed to simplify the law of libel for the media and those taking legal actions. There are many positive provisions in the Bill which I fully support. At present, newspapers and print publications are reluctant to apologise even when they have made genuine errors as to do so could expose them to legal proceedings. This, in turn, can lead protracted court cases which can impose enormous costs, particularly for people eager to restore their good name. The Bill will do much to clear up what is, at present, a very grey area. The Bill will mark the start of a move towards a system based on conciliation. This change will strengthen the hand of the Press Ombudsman and Press Council in dealing with complaints against journalists and editors. The new defence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest, rather than public importance, is aimed at bringing greater clarity to the law. The term “public interest” is well understood in case law and hopefully this will clear up any ambiguity. The issue of what “public interest” means was raised on Committee Stage in the context of the death of the late Mr. Liam Lawlor — may he rest in peace. The coverage of Liam’s death was particularly hurtful to his family in what was already a terrible time for them. The coverage of death, including by suicide, is a particularly sensitive area. The Press Council has an opportunity to step in and determine what is fair and reasonable. This function is best left to the Press Council, rather than going down the legislative route. That said, I was concerned at some of the media coverage of the recent horrific tragedy in Wexford. Some of the reporting must have caused further suffering to the broken families and friends left behind. In similar circumstances in the United Kingdom, a system is in place whereby only one photographer attends the funeral and photographs are then pooled. I do not see why such a system could not operate here. It is vital that the Press Ombudsman and the Press Council have the full support of publishers, editors and journalists. It is also vital that those who make complaints, be they public figures or otherwise, feel free to do so without fear of recrimination or of being singled out by the media. The Bill will encourage journalists, who often work under time pressures and tight deadlines, to be more aware of the need for fair and accurate journalism. In this regard, I congratulate all members of the print media who have signed up. Freedom of the press is essential to our democracy but it cannot be completely unfettered. The establishment of the Press Council, along with the passing of the Defamation Bill, will ensure that the traditional high standards of Irish journalism will hold firm in the new globalised media market. Speaking in the Seanad, the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said he had recently indicated to the Press Ombudsman his wish for the Press Council to address as a priority the breach by newspapers of the fundamental Irish custom of respect for the dead, especially on the occasion of a funeral. We have a great respect for the dead, especially at the sad time of funerals. This respect must be maintained. The Minister was responding to concerns expressed by Fianna Fa´il Senators Jim Walsh and Denis O’Donovan about the impact on the family of the late Deputy Liam Lawlor of reports published in the immediate aftermath of his death in a car crash. The matter was raised on Committee Stage of the Defamation Bill. The Minister said there were difficulties about dealing with the issue in this legislation but that it was a matter on which action would need to be taken. 394 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

He was anxious to give the Press Council an opportunity to plug the black hole. However, he also said that if the Press Council could not demonstrate a capacity to do so and legislators could not address in the Bill the issue of defamation of a deceased person at the time of his or her funeral, he would return to the issue when dealing with the Privacy Bill. He stated it was an issue which he was not prepared to let pass any further. He said the new defence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest rather than public importance was aimed at bringing greater clarity to the law. The term “public interest” was well understood and well established in case law and also reflected recent developments before the courts when Mr. Justice Peter Charlton had made reference to it. Others are concerned that the change will enable a defence of defamation to be mounted with a very low standard of proof. The view was expressed that it was necessary to have a definition of “public interest” included in the Bill. The media will be entitled to lodge a sum of money in court without an admission of liability. Another important change in the law is the creation of an offence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest. One of the principles accepted by the Minister during the course of the debate in the Seanad was that an apology by the media would have to be given the same prominence as the original offending article. The Bill was described in the Seanad as a progressive measure. We all hope it will lead to better relationships between the press and the people. The concept of the Press Council is to give the public a faster and cheaper avenue to resolving grievances with newspapers than that provided by the courts. The aim of the council should be to encourage newspapers to resolve all complaints internally in the first instance. Most newspapers and magazines are well equipped to do this. I hope complaints can be resolved within six weeks once the system is fully operational. Only in cases where complainants and publishers fail to reach agreement will the Press Ombudsman or the Press Council impose any sanctions. Bereavement is one issue on which it is hoped newspapers will show more sensitivity. I commend the Bill to the House. The majority of journalists are decent, honourable, reliable, sensible and fair-minded. My brother is a journalist, as is my nephew and sister-in-law. I take the opportunity to commend the Longford Leader, the Longford News and Shannonside radio for their excellent coverage which is fair and impartial at all times. I was told one time that the only bad publicity was an obituary but I do not believe that any more.

Deputy Mattie McGrath: I congratulate the new Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and wish him, his wife and family and all his officials the very best for the future. His is a difficult role. I compliment the former Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, on the role he played in the Department and his far-seeing developments. The reform of our defamation laws has been long in the making but is to be welcomed, even though overdue. The setting up of the Press Council and the Office of the Press Ombudsman was the work of the former Minister, Mr. Michael McDowell. It is no easy task to reach agreement among all the elements of the media industry to the code of conduct and complaints mechanism. Credit for this considerable achievement is due to the Irish press industry steering committee which brought together the representatives of the national and regional newspapers, as well as the UK newspapers with Irish editions and the periodical publishers. The role of the Press Ombudsman and the Press Council is to ensure newspapers and magazines abide by a code of practice agreed with the support of all major newspaper and magazine publishers and the National Union of Journalists. The concept is to give the public a faster and cheaper avenue to resolving grievances with newspapers than the courts provide. We all know that going to court should be a last resort and can be very time consuming and an arduous and lengthy process. I would like to see newspapers resolve all complaints internally in the first instance and most papers and magazines are well equipped to do this. It is hoped complaints will be resolved within six weeks once the system is fully operational. Only in cases where 395 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Mattie McGrath.] complainants and publishers fail to reach an agreement between themselves will the Press Ombudsman or the Press Council impose any sanctions. A section of the proposed Defamation Bill will allow newspapers to apologise where they have made genuine errors. Fear of litigation if an apology is offered can be an impediment. Any publication that offers an apology to a third party may find itself open to legal proceedings if this is a case of defamation or if untruths are told about a person or an organisation. This has long resulted in a reluctance on the part of newspapers to apologise, even when they recognise that an error has been made. This is a grey area. Some have reservations and concerns about media intrusion and this is not exclusive to those of us involved in politics. However, the former Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, was emphatic that if the media failed to show respect for the right to privacy as specified in their own code of practice, the Government would proceed rapidly with its privacy legislation. This is to be welcomed as a further measure to strengthen this new provision. The Bill underpins the activities of the Press Council and the Press Ombudsman and removes the liability previously associated with an apology. This change will strengthen the hand of the Press Ombudsman and the Press Council when dealing with complaints against journalists and editors. There is a new defence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest. This is an important development in terms of the ability of the media to investigate and report on matters of public interest. This is to be welcomed and the media are to be thanked. We owe them a great debt for their investigations. They bring us the news and report on what is happening. Also of importance is the ability of the media to investigate themselves in cases involving wrong-doing. This is not an easy defence to plead and not for use in trivial circumstances. Many are sceptical about libel law reform as they fear that any action taken against the media will result in the media exacting their revenge such as making them a target for further negative stories or publicity. This would certainly be the view of many in public life. The world of journalism must be open to public scrutiny. The code of ethics sets out clear guidelines which must have the full support of all the stakeholders — publishers, editors and journalists. The establishment of the Press Council code of practice and the Defamation Bill uphold the principle of a free press but also urge journalists to be fair, accurate and truthful and to respect the right of all individuals, including public figures, to a private life. Bereavement is an area where we hope newspapers could show more sensitivity. In regard to recent and ongoing events, I appeal to all organs of the media to exercise restraint. There was a recent tragedy in Wexford and earlier this year in my community a horrific murder was committed in a rural parish. Communities in those areas are not able to deal with the intrusion. It is bad enough to suffer the trauma of a terrible deed and senseless act and to try to come to terms with it while comforting the grieving families without the intrusion of the media who have a scrum in the community for photographs and background evidence of the family. That is unacceptable. If a person is convicted of a crime and gets a custodial sentence which he serves, he pays his debt to society. Hopefully, he will have been rehabilitated while in prison. When that person is released, he is a free person. In the recent case in Wexford, nobody could have any facts in regard to what happened. Yet journalists came on radio and television and tried to piece together the last desperate acts that may have taken place in that household and put a picture to a tragic story. That is deplorable and must be condemned out of hand. Nobody could or should be expected to condone that. Where a person seeks legal redress following an apology, which I had to do and got it, the cost of defamation litigation is over priced. It is almost impossible to obtain the relevant apol- 396 Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: 14 May 2008. Second Stage (Resumed) ogy because of the costs incurred by the injured party and, if successful, by the newspapers who have to print an apology. That is unfair also.

Acting Chairman: I call the Minister but remind him that I have to conclude the debate at a minute to seven.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I thank all the Members who have contributed to the debate. As in the Seanad, Members on all sides have strong views on this issue. I have listened to a number of speakers since coming into the House but I kept a close eye on the debate from my office. It is clear that many Deputies have personal issues in regard the law of defamation. I have taken account of their contributions and will bear them in mind on Committee Stage. I have noted particularly the views expressed by Deputies in defence of fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest, as set out in section 24. I share many of the misgivings expressed in regard to what constitutes the public interest. However, our courts and those in the UK and their decisions in this area have evolved a new type of defence in respect of matters of public interest whose discussions would be of benefit to the public. Deputies should be aware that this defence will be a difficult one to plead successfully. It is clear that it will not be available for trivial issues, often manifested in some of our print media. The provisions of section 24 seek to put a statutory framework on the jurisprudence that is being developed. Deputies mentioned the operation of the Press Council. As my predecessor mentioned, it is a light model of regulation and is just up and running. The House will wish to give it some time to reach an effective level of operation. Deputies will appreciate that it would be inappropriate of me to comment on the recent resignation of a member of the Press Council. He made his position clear in a newspaper article, which I read with some interest. Deputy Rabbitte asked how many members were on the Press Council. There are 13 members — seven are independent public interest directors, five represent owners and publishers and one represents journalists. In effect, it has an independent lay majority. In connection with what Professor John Horgan had to say in his article, Deputy Rabbitte asked what should be our attitude. It is important that we allow the Press Council to establish its own practices and procedures. It is not for us to be prescriptive in regard to how it should lay down its operating procedures. Others may have a view on that issue. We should err on the side of caution when it comes to intervening. Many Deputies asked for clarity in regard to the Privacy Bill which is on the Order Paper. I am happy to provide that clarity. Deputies should bear in mind that the Privacy Bill creates no new law, rather it puts a statutory framework on the existing constitutional right to privacy and it has regard to the rights provided under the European Convention on Human Rights. In so doing, it incorporates the developing jurisprudence in regard to the appropriate protection of privacy in our courts, the UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The Privacy Bill seeks to inhabit the space between, on the one hand, the Data Protection Acts and, on the other, the necessary and appropriate provisions in regard to security and crime issues. The focus of the Privacy Bill is not as some commentators and Members seem to think all about possible violations of privacy by the media and nothing else. This simply is not so. The Bill deals with a range of situations where the privacy of a person might be violated and which would not involve the media at all. Many of the complaints my Department receives in this regard involve actions by individual citizens against each other. I am sure other Members receive similar complaints from time to time. The Privacy Bill provides innovatively, and for the first time in Irish law, for the protection of a person’s right to control the exploitation of their own image for commercial purposes. This has been in the news recently in regard to sports persons and others. The privacy provision in 397 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] the Press Council’s code of practice will help if its members are willing to subscribe to the standards set down to prevent excesses by the media and to avoid unnecessary court actions. The law in respect of defamation and privacy is dynamic. It changes its features constantly. We need to keep under review all developments of the law.

Acting Chairman: The time has expired.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Only a short passage remains. Perhaps with the consent of the House I could finish; otherwise, I would have to leave it over to tomorrow. We must be mindful of the constitutional right to one’s good name and must ensure that mechanisms for protecting and vindicating citizen’s rights are effective. This means we must continuously subject to review all statutory mechanisms for protecting and vindicating those rights. We have a duty to uphold those principles. I am somewhat surprised at the position expressed by some Fine Gael and Labour Deputies. They seem to show little regard for the existing right of privacy of citizens and the balance between competing rights. Do they suggest or advocate that violations of privacy be privileged in most if not all cases, rather than seek to provide the appropriate balance instead? There is no threat, as Deputy Flanagan and others might assert, to investigative journalism that rightly seeks to hold Government, institutions of the State, business and other organisations up to scrutiny. The opposite is the case. The Defamation Bill 2006 respects and provides the necessary balance between the competing rights of freedom of expression and of the respect for one’s good name and reputation. I intend to advance the Defamation Bill. In view of the fact that the issue of privacy may affect individual members of the public, my Department will continue to take into 7 o’clock account developments in this area of the law in our courts and elsewhere and views expressed by interested parties and the public on the details of that Privacy Bill. We will examine suggestions and consider drafting appropriate amendments. I appreciate Deputies’ contributions and will bear them in mind during the preparations for Committee Stage.

Question put and agreed to.

Defamation Bill 2006 [Seanad]: Referral to Select Committee. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I move:

That the Bill be referred to the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights, in accordance with Standing Order 120(1) and paragraph 1(a)(i) of the Orders of Reference of that committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Private Members’ Business.

————

Irish Economy: Motion (Resumed).

The following motion was moved by Deputy Joan Burton on Tuesday, 13 May 2008: That Da´il E´ ireann, 398 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

seriously concerned at the recent poor performance of important economic indicators, including: — the cost of living increases, reflected in the latest consumer price index figure of 4.3%, and the even greater increase in food prices which have severely impacted on families; — the increase in the live register by 1,600 persons per week in the first four months of 2008; — the fall in the CSO construction employment index by 11% in the 12 months to February 2008; — the fall in the ESRI consumer confidence index to its lowest level since the index was first introduced; — the first fall in retail sales since 2004; and — the poor performance of tax revenues which are running \736 million below target in the first four months of the year; alarmed at the job losses in recent weeks in construction, manufacturing and services; noting: — that the most immediate cause of this downturn is the collapse of the domestic property boom, with housing construction likely to fall by approximately 50% when compared to 2006; — the deterioration in international trading conditions for Irish firms; — the failure of importers from the sterling and dollar areas to pass on price reductions to both commercial and retail customers; — the deterioration in cost competitiveness for Irish firms; and — that the Government has brought forward no positive policy proposals to deal with the downturn or any of its consequences; calls on the Government to introduce targeted measures to address the downturn in the economy, including: — give a direction to the National Consumer Agency to insist that all goods are priced in euro and requesting the agency to more actively monitor pricing to ensure fair play for consumers and to protect against rip-offs; — develop a major programme of education, training and re-skilling for people losing their jobs in construction and in manufacturing; — proceed with a substantial programme of school building, to absorb some of the spare capacity in the house building sector, to deliver modern schools for students, good value for money for the taxpayer, and to ease the immediate burden of the slowdown in construction; — the introduction of a “begin to buy” scheme to restore activity in residential construction; and — to shift the balance of advantage within the tax code from property-based investment to high-tech, high-risk ventures.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 1: To delete all words after “Da´il E´ ireann” and substitute the following: 399 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

“— welcomes the Government’s firm commitment to position the economy for sustainable development over the years ahead, while adapting to the reality of more moderate growth in the future; — welcomes the Government’s commitment to improving national competitiveness, as demonstrated by its maintenance of a low burden of taxation on labour and capital and by the priority that it has given to investment under the national development plan in the economy’s physical infrastructure and skill levels which will enhance Ireland’s productive capacity and thereby lay the foundations for future improvements in living standards; and — commends the Government for ensuring that Ireland’s public finances are in a strong position to meet the existing challenges with one of the lowest levels of general Government debt in the euro area, general Government surpluses delivered in ten of the last 11 years, net debt forecast to be around 14% at the end of 2008 and a current budget surplus.” —(Minister of State at the Department of Finance). Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I propose to share time with my colleague, Deputy Richard Bruton. I reiterate the point I made last night that the challenge facing the economy is one of competitiveness and the possibility that recent job losses will be followed by large-scale job losses. Notwithstanding the report issued by the ESRI today, problems do not vanish of their own accord. Corrective action is needed. A couple of years ago, house prices in an area adjoining my constituency increased by \80,000 over one weekend. If anyone considered such an increase sustainable, I am in the wrong business. Someone should have recognised the need to act at that time. Having done the right thing and purchased these houses, the home owners faced an increase in their costs and must seek wage increases to fund them. This would not have been necessary if timely action had been taken to curtail the spiralling house prices that drove the economy crazy.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I congratulate the Labour Party on tabling this timely motion. The economy is on the tip of everybody’s tongue and the economic outlook has changed dramatically in recent months. The extraordinary complacency of the Government in failing to respond to these changed circumstances has been startling. It did not respond to a call by the National Competitiveness Council for an action plan to address the recent loss of competitiveness. Similarly, a group established to address prices has not met for 12 months, despite inflation increasing at a faster rate than the European average. Ireland imports a substantial number of food products from the United Kingdom. Despite the depreciation in sterling of almost 20% in the past 12 months, prices continue to rise in the shops. As the motion points out, consumers are being ripped off, with prices for many ordinary household goods as much as 25% higher than the price of identical goods in the UK. It is bewildering that the Government continues to sit on its hands and pretend it does not have any responsibility for this matter. If people are being ripped off, we need an effective consumer agency to address the problem. I do not favour reversion to the type of price controls used in the 1980s. However, a name and shame approach should be adopted to apply pressure on stores to be fair to consumers. The long-term survival of these companies depends on being competitive. If there is a conspiracy of silence which leaves consumers ripped off, it will damage the economy in the long term. The approach of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to the forthcoming talks will be influenced by the sight of rising food prices and the mortgage pressures and erosion in living standards being 400 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed) experienced by young people who form the bulk of active trade union membership. It is the Government’s responsibility to address this issue. The motion is also timely because an ESRI report published today noted significant potential in the economy. although its economic growth projections have been scaled down from a figure of 5%. The critical question is whether we can seize this potential coming off the back of a period during which this country, under the leadership of the Government, surrendered its vital lead in many critical areas. Ireland was once the envy of other countries. Having been leading edge in access to telecoms, we are now at the bottom of the league in critical areas such as broadband. Ireland, once the leading country in Europe in the Government provision of electronic access to services, now languishes at 17th place in the league having failed dismally to implement change. The Government will argue that the knowledge economy is key to the future, despite presiding over circumstances in which the application of the knowledge economy in public services and infrastructure is moving in the opposite direction. Joined up thinking is required. If the Government expresses ambitions, it must drive forward strategies and policies. The tragedy of this regime is not that it lacked ambition but that in many areas, including its health strategy and decentralisation programme, its ambition was not matched by coherent analysis of the problem. Workable strategies must be developed and driven against hard time lines. Management structures must be established and afforded a genuine opportunity to deliver these key strategies, which should not be driven by people who are trying to accomplish 1,000 other management tasks. Private sector organisations undertaking major change management programmes, such as the decentralisation programme or the climate change or spatial strategies, would not depend on people who answer parliamentary questions and meet ministerial delegations to deliver them. They would establish a dedicated team with a budget and the authority to drive the strategy. The Government believes it can talk about ambitious climate change and spatial strategies without taking action to deliver them. What is the outcome of this approach? Under the spatial strategy, 500,000 additional homes have been built not in the compact, low energy fashion required, but scattered throughout the country in a way that places high demands on transport and creates major dislocation. This also holds for the Government’s strategy on climate change articulated in 2000. In the eight intervening years it made no impact on the challenge facing us. The economy and environment will be so closely interlocked in the coming years that we will look back and ask how we threw away the opportunity to be an early mover on climate change and why we did not exploit the opportunities to create the infrastructure that could have made Ireland a leading player in turning a challenge into an opportunity. The roots of this failure lie not in the Government not being aware of the problem, but its inability and unwillingness to address it in a coherent manner. While I admire my colleague from County Meath, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey, for putting his hands up and accepting the Government failed to deliver the climate change strategy, it is even worse that, having made this admission, the Government has failed to change the system that caused the problem. Unfortunately, it is highly likely that the mistake will be repeated as the ESRI report indicates the organisation does not believe the Government will deliver the climate change strategy it has set for the coming years. These are critical issues. Our economy is reaching a critical period in which we must recognise that priorities mean something. One cannot promise everything as the programme for Government does, including more hospital beds, more teachers, less tax and so on. That is no longer realistic. If there is to be a new Government, there must be new hard-headed thinking on what is affordable and on our priorities and how we will change things to deliver them. Sadly, I have not seen that thinking in the first week of this new regime. I see it going back to the old way with a taskforce 401 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] on this, a commission for that and a review of something else. That will not result in the progress we need. We are leaving a period in which this Government squandered economic success and did not apply it in a way which would leave us robust. We are seeing the consequences of that which are so admirably explained in this motion.

Deputy A´ ine Brady: I wish to share time with Deputies Michael Kennedy, Michael Moynihan and Peter Kelly and the Minister of State, Deputy Jimmy Devins. Ta´ an a´thas orm bheith ag freastal ar an dıóspo´ ireacht seo. Aithnı´m go bhfuil cursaı´ eacnama- ıóchta ar fud an domhain ag cur bru´ ar cursaı´ eacnamaıóchta sa tı´r seo. Ag an am ceánna, ba mhaith liom dı´riu´ isteach ar na straiteísı´ ata´ curtha i bhfeidhm againn chun an fhadhb sin a fhreagairt. The country has prospered over the past ten years. Investment in the national development plan demonstrates the Government’s determination to proceed with the policy mix to sustain the progress already achieved. Without labouring the point, we should reflect that in 1997 some 1.4 million people were working in Ireland while today that figures stands at approximately 2.1 million. Last year, we spent over \1.7 billion on our road network and completed over 200 km of motorway and 624 km of new or redesigned national roads as well as opening the Dublin Port tunnel. We are quite rightly investing significant resources in public transport projects such as the Kildare route project, the Maynooth line upgrade and Luas. Investment in new buses and in quality bus corridors are a clear indication of how our country has changed for the better and that we are laying the foundation for further improvements. In 1997, total investment in research and development by Government in third level and business-led research was in the order of \220 million. Last year committed expenditure on research and development was almost \1 billion. In NUI Maynooth, for instance, greater focus is being placed on research, the commercialisation of research and on innovation. Colleges are now working hand in glove with industry to ensure the research they are pursuing is relevant. They are being supported in part by the Government-funded Science Foundation Ireland. A recent announcement by Intel that it was appointing NUI Maynooth as its first global education partner is a most significant move for both institutions and reflects the success of policies of both NUI Maynooth and the Government in the area of research and development and innovation. The Government continues to be committed to low direct taxes to encourage enterprise on the part of investors and workers. We now apply the lowest tax wedge on workers’ incomes in the OECD and our very competitive corporation tax rate coupled with a young, educated and committed workforce has led investors to locate here. Companies such as Intel, Hewlett-Pack- ard and Wyeth in my county are a testament to the successful policy mix at play delivering for both the enterprises and our country. The capacity to deliver strong performance reflects the efforts of many people, especially the working men and women of this country. Investment in our human capital to up-skill our workforce demonstrates the Government’s determination to pursue a policy framework which will bed down our success to date. Investment in our people through training and education is a key enabler to optimising the benefit of the knowledge economy. Oil prices at record levels, double what they were last year, the financial housing crisis in the US and world stock market volatility, all mean that as an open economy we will not be immune to these events. As the Taoiseach pointed out, we will need to make adjustments for the long- term gain. However, despite the global downturn, we are managing well. Today’s Economic 402 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed) and Social Research Institute report, which forecasts that the Irish economy will grow by an average of 3.75% per year between now and 2010, will instill renewed confidence in our economy. It also signals the successful management of the economy to date. As this is my first opportunity to contribute to a debate on financial matters since the appointment of the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, to the Department of Finance, I wish him well. He brings with him not only his very significant intellect but also a rich tradition of public service. While the Government knows that over the short term it faces new difficulties and constraints, the policies being adopted ensure we are well-equipped to overcome these problems because they ensure the public finances are sound and that we are investing in our human capital and infrastructure to secure future growth. We are also pursuing policies which protect the most vulnerable in society. I commend the Government amendment to the House.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: Ta´ a´thas orm caint ar an a´bhar seo. I congratulate the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, on his important role as Minister for Finance. I have no doubt he will continue the great work carried out by his predecessor, the Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen. It gives me pleasure to speak on this subject, especially on the day the ESRI issued a report indicating the Irish economy will grow by over 3.5% in the coming years. It must be frustrating for Deputy Burton to have moved this motion given the expectations the ESRI report outlined.

Deputy Joan Burton: Why?

Deputy Michael Kennedy: I wonder if she will be disappointed as things improve when she will have to look for another stick with which to attempt to beat the Government’s policy.

Deputy Joan Burton: The only person disappointed this week was Deputy Michael McGrath when he was passed over.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: I take umbrage with Deputy Burton’s assertion that our policy- makers are belatedly responding the country’s economic situation. There is no denial of Ireland’s economic state on this side of the House but merely a steely determination to get on with running the country and not spend our time talking ourselves into a recession. The one thing Deputy Burton got right is the strength of the Irish economy which she outlined last night, namely, our young educated employees; our hardworking, diligent more mature workforce; our strong education infrastructure; our healthy jobs market which despite detractors still outperforms most European economies; and our improving public transport infrastructure. The Government is investing in these areas, as did the previous one. This is the course on which the former Minister for Finance and new Taoiseach is stirring us. These factors will ultimately give re-birth to the economy, according to today’s ESRI report. There is no doubt there has been a downturn in our economy but as the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, said last night, this is as a result of our country being an integrated economy. This integration ensured our economic growth and will allow us to grow in the future. Once we steer this ship carefully and spend in line with our growth, we will stay on course to remain one of Europe’s most vibrant economies. Difficulties in the USA have not helped and the UK and other countries find themselves in a similar position. International problems affect us and it would be the height of arrogance to expect that Ireland would be immune. We have been hit by the price of oil, the sub-prime 403 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Michael Kennedy.] lending crisis in the US and the strength of the euro and the knock on effect on trade. To imply that this Government is not capable of dealing with the issue, or worse not willing to do so, is irresponsible at best. Fianna Fa´il and its partners in Government have presided over the greatest economic growth this country has ever witnessed. Deputy Burton mentioned that when the Labour Party left power in 1997, 1,000 new jobs were being created weekly. I remind her that was at a time when unemployment was over 10%. It is now half that.

Deputy Joan Burton: Some 1,600 jobs per week are being lost at the moment.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: Since the advent of this Government and the previous one, economic growth has averaged over 7% per annum. While this has fallen in recent years, today’s ESRI report predicts a return to over 5% growth in the next five years or so. The same economic fundamentals to which Deputy Burton referred are ultimately the same factors which will prevent us from plunging into the economic pit of despair into which my Dublin colleague believes we are headed. I remain confident in this Government’s ability to handle the economy. The implication that the Taoiseach is mishandling the economy bears the hallmarks of political sabotage by an Opposition party with nothing to offer the electorate other than reactionary gibberish. Of all the gibberish uttered by Deputy Burton last night, what I found most offensive was her comparison of Ministers’ alleged mishandling of the economy with the response of US officials to Hurricane Katrina. That was a cheap shot and the Deputy knows it.

Deputy Joan Burton: No wonder Deputy Kennedy was passed over if that is the best he can come up with in a speech.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: She showed extremely bad taste. Lest she forget, these Ministers managed a period of unparalleled success and prosperity and they are members of a party which was voted into Government by a majority. The Deputy’s party and her colleagues in Fine Gael failed to achieve that aim. She should remember that her cheap shots are likely to offend the people who voted for us. If there was an Oscar for doom and gloom, there would be nominations for several Oppo- sition Deputies but Deputy Burton would undoubtedly receive the award.

Deputy Joan Burton: Deputy Kennedy will continue to be passed over.

Deputy Michael Kennedy: Last night’s contribution from her was nothing but a piece performance art.

Deputy Joan Burton: He must be capable of more. Does he plan to stand in Dublin West?

Deputy Michael Moynihan: I welcome this opportunity to commend the Government’s amendment to the House. I congratulate the Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, and the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Mansergh, on assuming their new roles. The national development plan is one of the cornerstones of the Government’s strategy for the future. It is vital that we continue to develop infrastructure in rural as well as urban areas. We must progress the decentralisation programme because it brings development to smaller towns and allows public service thinking to expand beyond the confines of Dublin, thereby providing a balanced input into the development of policies and regulations. 404 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

The developments that have taken place throughout the country belie the Opposition claim that the Government squandered the boom. Examples of these developments are the not-for- profit child care facilities which have been built at enormous cost to the taxpayer and which provide important supports for young couples with children. In recent years, 45,000 additional permanent places in primary schools and 22,500 places in post-primary schools have been provided, along with enhanced facilities. This is no mean achievement. The Government has spent money wisely on building child care facilities from scratch. Ten years ago the unemployment rate was 15% or more. Twenty years ago we were exporting 40,000 to 50,000 young people to England and America. Some of these are now living undocumented in America. For the first time since the Famine, we are providing for our own people and long may that continue. It is not correct to say that we have squandered the boom. The fundamentals of our economy are strong and, while challenges undoubtedly lie ahead, the Government will be able to meet them. The lessons of history must be learned and we must keep a tight rein on public finances. We must ensure, however, that the decentralisation programme continues to be rolled out. Despite the doom and gloom merchants, today’s ESRI report augurs well for our economy. I commend the Government’s amendment to the House.

Deputy Peter Kelly: There is no doubt that the Irish economy is experiencing challenges during what has been an extremely turbulent year on global markets. Oil prices have soared and the repercussions from the US subprime issue have been felt across the Atlantic. These are global issues and global problems. The Taoiseach stated at the launch of Fianna Fa´il’s Lisbon treaty campaign that Ireland is the most internationalised economy in Europe. That is why the effects of these global problems, most of which did not originate on Irish shores, are being felt by certain sectors of the economy. However, the concerns expressed about the Irish economy are premature. Today the ESRI published its assessment of the medium-term prospects for the Irish economy. The assessment was for the most part positive, with real GDP growth of 3% predicted over the medium term. This is much higher than the growth experienced by many of our European neighbours. The ESRI and the Minister for Finance agree that growth is likely to increase from 2010, which is the reason the Minister will be pursing sensible economic policies as we face more challenging economic times. The fundamentals of our economy are sound. We are a small and open economy with a young and educated workforce. The policies pursued by Fianna Fa´il-led Governments have ensured that Ireland continues to be an attractive place to do business. As the only English speaking country in the eurozone, our attractiveness to North America is unparalleled. Our physical proximity to Europe and our engagement with the European Union have been key to our economic success. It is not an exaggeration to say we have benefited more than most from the Single Market. Access to a market of almost 500 million consumers on our doorstep has transformed this country. This was emphasised today by the new Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, when he addressed the American Chamber of Commerce in Brussels. The Minister cited a few very impressive statistics there that I would like to mention. Foreign direct investment in Ireland exceeds \30 billion compared with \16 million in 1973 and is higher on a per capita basis than in any other European member state. Trade has increased 80-fold with consequent benefits for the number of people at work and the choice of products available to consumers. Our economy has been transformed with over 128,000 people employed in over 1,000 foreign-owned companies based in Ireland. A “No” vote in the forthcoming referendum is the greatest threat to our economy in the long term. A “No” vote would damage our pro-European image and is not what investors around the world want to hear. There has been condemnation in the House about the recent 405 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Peter Kelly.] slowdown in the housing market. The same people were talking about affordability in the marketplace and the problems faced by first-time buyers not so long ago. Approximately one third of the houses in this country have been built since Fianna Fa´il came into office in 1997 and this rate, unfortunately, is simply not sustainable. We are experiencing more normal levels of construction in line with other European countries. However, after last year’s general election and in the last budget the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, put in place a series of measures designed to support the housing market. Globalisation presents us with challenges but also with many opportunities. To ensure lower- skilled workers are not left behind we are investing in upskilling and training. Providing further education, skills and training will enable those in the low-skilled sectors to move to the growing high-skilled sector. Through investment in human capital we will continue to advance along the value chain. The national development plan is providing \2.8 billion for the programme to upskill the workforce. This year some 67,000 people in employment will receive training through FA´ S or Skillsnet funded programmes, an increase of 43% over the last two years. We are investing in graduates and are further developing a fourth level in our education system. Infrastructure is key to competitiveness. That is why we are investing so much in infrastructure. If we want to remain a competitive place to do business it is vital that the projects under Transport 21 and the NDP are implemented.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Jimmy Devins): I welcome the opportunity to restate our economic priorities which have helped make Ireland one of the wealthiest nations in Europe, enabled us to ride out a downturn already this decade and left us well positioned to maintain respectable growth rates during the current economic turbulence. Maintaining the capacity of the economy to consistently generate new employment opportunities requiring higher skills and providing higher rewards is a key policy of this Government. Our policies have a strong competitiveness focus. On our overall competitiveness, Ireland stands out in a number of important categories. The UN ranked Ireland fourth in the OECD 28 for quality of life in 2007. The Centre for European Reform ranks Ireland sixth in the EU 27 for overall competitiveness in 2008. WTO data show that Ireland is the 12th largest exporter of commercial services in the world. This Government is emphasizing the correct economic priorities. Seeking low inflation, promoting competition, pursuing a sensible incomes policy and keeping public spending growth at sustainable levels in the medium term are all important factors. Doing this will allow us to keep the burden of taxation low, maintain competitiveness and maximise our economic potential. These are all part of the Government’s strategy, improving the cost environment and enhancing competitiveness. It is imperative to ensure labour costs are intrinsically linked to ensuring productivity, thereby supporting employment creation and safeguarding competition. Regarding international price competitiveness, because much of Ireland’s trade is outside the eurozone, our enterprise development agencies are providing specialised assistance to Irish exporters to focus on developing into the eurozone and emerging markets to win new export sales. Our export promotion policies are exerting a direct and positive influence on the ability of Irish exporters to grow their overseas business. Active measures are also being taken to improve the capabilities of indigenous firms in meeting global competition by greater investment in innovation and other value enhancing activities. Becoming more innovation-intensive on the basis of a clear market and customer focus leads to products and services that are better able to withstand purely cost-based competitive pressures. 406 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

Cost competitiveness is a key component of the work of the Competition Authority from its enforcement and merger reviews through to much of its advocacy work. The authority has completed a number of important studies of competition in areas such as banking, insurance, including private health insurance, professional services and public transport, all of which have instituted much-needed reforms in these sectors. Strengthened resources and a firm mandate for the Competition Authority are helping deliver more competition in the economy, particularly as the authority’s investigation activities begin to make an impact on sectors where competition is not as keen as required by a modern economy.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: It sounds as if the Competition Authority wrote that speech.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: The anti-inflation group is actively engaging with the CSO, the Com- petition Authority, the National Consumer Agency and the Commission for Energy Regulation with a view to co-ordinating and driving the fight against inflation on an informed basis. The Government is very conscious of the need to control costs to maintain competitiveness. Through the national development plan and our taxation and regulatory policies, the Govern- ment is committed to putting in place an environment for enterprise that remains among the most favourable in the world. We have the advantage of still being one of the most competitive small countries in the world. The national skills strategy is an essential component in achieving the full transformation of the Irish economy into one of the world’s most dynamic, knowledge-based economies. The skills strategy is set against a background of an education and training system which has served Ireland very well. This system has played a key role in attracting and retaining foreign direct investment and ensuring we have the ability to meet the skills needs of enterprises. The strategy will help us to target specific skills and sectors that will become increasingly important in the next few years. It will allow us to address gaps in our skills base. It will help us to build an education and training system that will allow us to quickly adapt and respond to the changing global business environment. The Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation 2006-2013, SSTI, is a key mechanism for addressing the challenges facing Ireland across the research spectrum. It embodies our sustained commitment to the research agenda and the importance of successfully managing the transition to a knowledge economy. The SSTI represents a major ramping up of Ireland’s commitment to the knowledge economy and our engagement with it. As we all know, global competition has increased the pressure on quality, efficiency, productivity and innovation. The SSTI will shape the future of Irish research and enterprise policy, building on our known strengths in the high-tech sectors, such as ICT, bio-pharmaceuticals and medical devices, to ensure quality employment and social advancement. The SSTI is clear about the types and levels of support that must be given to the most significant drivers of our economic well being, namely, manufacturing and internationally-traded services firms. While different challenges face enterprises in both sectors, our development agencies are committed to bringing about a transformational change to company attitudes to research and development and to grow business expenditure on research and development to \2.5 billion by 2013. As we become more innovation-intensive on the basis of a clear market and customer focus, we develop products and services that are better able to withstand purely cost-based competitive pressures. Developing successful entrepreneurs and world-class enterprises are essential ingredients in any economy based on innovation.

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

Deputy Jimmy Devins: It is just the last paragraph. 407 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

Deputy Emmet Stagg: The good bit.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: This Government will continue its firm commitment to implement policies to drive economic growth, to build on the higher value sectors of the economy, particularly in the knowledge-based areas, and to enhance productivity through investment under the national development plan, the strategy for science, technology and innovation and through the skills strategy.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I wish to share time with Deputies Liz McManus, Mary Upton, Joanna Tuffy, Sea´n Sherlock and Leo Varadkar.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Agreed.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: Perhaps the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will tell me when I have almost taken up the first minutes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Yes, indeed.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I commend my colleague, Deputy Joan Burton, for tabling this motion and giving us the opportunity to debate the economy at this crucial time, particularly in light of the information we have been getting on a downturn in the economy in recent years and in light of the fact we have a new Taoiseach. Sadly, despite what Deputy Kelly stated earlier, that one third of all the houses in Ireland were built since 1997, we heard on the news tonight there has been a 25% drop in new mortgages over the past year. Clearly, those good times in the construction industry have come to a sharp end, without any kind of planning on how we might deal with this. One minute we are up and the next we are down. There does not appear to have been any concern whatsoever for the construction workers whose jobs are at stake. My office, as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be aware, is in the Mechanics Institute in Limerick, a building owned by construction unions. I talk to the people coming in and out of that building and there is a real fear for jobs in the construction industry. I am sure this relates not just to my constituency but throughout the country. As I stated, there does not appear to have been any planning for this or any attempt to address the real needs of these workers and the fact they have families who depend on them. The same is not true of the developers who have made big bucks in the construction industry. In many cases there has not even been monitoring of the tax breaks they were given. I will cite two examples. There is a student accommodation unit close to where I live which was built on tax incentives for student accommodation and as far as I can see, there is not a single student living in it. They got the tax breaks for student accommodation and they are letting it out to workers. Similarly, I know people who deliver child care who have not benefited by any reduction in their costs from the tax breaks for child care. Those tax breaks have gone to the people who developed the buildings, not to the people to delivered the service. There has not even been monitoring of the kind of tax breaks that were available. In the short time available, I want to refer to the way in which we should be developing tax breaks. Tax breaks should be used to provide incentive to those who offer opportunities to develop small indigenous industries. I particularly refer, for example, to campus-based companies. There are many campus-based companies in ITs and universities. Generally, they lack capital but they have plenty of ideas, in the IT area and in many other inventive areas. There should be tax breaks for such companies rather than for people making vast sums of money in the construction industry. Energy saving construction areas should also enjoy tax breaks. 408 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

My colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, last night spoke of republicanism and patriotism. We should be asking our rich people to put their money into such indigenous small industries rather than into making money for themselves. Now that they cannot make it in the construction industry here at home they are turning their attention to Spain, eastern Europe and other places to make the fast buck. We should have leadership from the top — from Government — encouraging people to invest their money here in Ireland where we can expect to have growth rather than just spend it in ways to enrich themselves as opposed to their community and society.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy has one minute remaining.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: We need to invest here at home in infrastructure such as schools, as was stated last night, but also, for example, in the health care area. There is a verbal commitment to community care teams. We could invest in buildings where we could have GPs, physiotherapists, social workers, public health nurses etc. in their communities working in multi- integrated teams. That is how we should be spending our money. If there is a reduction in tax revenue, there is also a reduction in the amount of money to spend on services. That is a real concern, particularly when we see the kind of cutbacks evident in the public health services, in schools not reaching targets on class size etc. There is much more I could say but I will leave the time to my colleagues.

Deputy Liz McManus: I welcome this timely debate. We all listened to the Taoiseach in recent days setting out his new approach that would be fair and inclusive. He has been put to the test and, frankly, listening to the speeches from the Government side, I will not hold my breath for a change of approach. When one looks at the unemployment figures, there is a serious problem. Nationally, there are approximately 1,600 being added to the live register every week. In my constituency, which is not a particularly remarkable one for job losses, 25% have been added to the live register in a year. That has a significant impact on people’s ability to look after their families and to keep going. I am already hearing of people emigrating and that indicates we are in a very different place than we were a year ago. I welcome the fact that in this motion there is reference to the cost of living and food prices. There is a particular problem with the rise of fuel prices, which are affecting people significantly. Petrol rose by 28% since 2005. The price of diesel has for this first time risen higher than that of petrol even though the time of year would dictate that it would be reduced. I have written to the National Consumer Agency requesting it investigate why this is happening. I listened to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, being fairly wimpish about the issue of petrol and fuel prices and stating what can we do. Perhaps we cannot do anything, but I note that in Australia they have just appointed a petrol commissioner whose is to sort out the oil companies and their different approach is interesting. Today we heard that Bord Ga´is E´ ireann is looking for a 17% to 19% price increase. Elec- tricity prices will follow suit. While that is hitting the householder, and particularly the low income householder severely, the coffers of the Government are bulging with VAT returns. In only four years the amount of money coming from fuel alone in VAT returns has increased by 50% to \970 million, which is phenomenal growth. That money is coming into the Exchequer and meanwhile it is not being returned, particularly to tackle the issue of fuel poverty or to assist people who are trying to reduce their fuel costs in ensuring better energy efficiency. In fact, one statistic I came across today which comes from the Money Advice and Budgeting Service is that two years ago the amount of money owing to utility companies by their clients 409 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Liz McManus.] was \864,000 whereas last year the amount almost doubled to \1.5 million. That is the hidden experience of people on low incomes. My last point relates to skills development. There is a shortage of qualified people to install energy efficiency changes in houses or commercial buildings. People who have worked in the building sector are ideally suited to carrying out this work. If there was a really good effective scheme to ensure energy efficiency in our buildings and if we retrained these people as instal- lers, we would ensure the Government would meet its climate change targets. Clearly, the Government will not do so and the ESRI has confirmed that today. It also would ensure that people develop new skills that give them the chance of work. It is important that there is less talk about energy and more action. This is an example of an area where the Government can development new skills where they are needed, but what we actually see from the Government in terms of the price of fuel is a fuel poverty strategy. We have nothing at present to protect people on low incomes and it is time that we did.

Deputy Mary Upton: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion, which was put forward by my party. I particularly wish to focus on the sensible proposal for a substantial programme of school building. The opportunity that exists to concentrate on a substantial school building programme that will absorb some of the unfortunate spare capacity in the house building sector. The CSO figures for employment in construction are down 11% year on year and there is a tangible difference in the number of planning applications in my own constituency of Dublin south central. A number of my constituents have asked me if I know of any major projects that are about to begin in the constituency for which they might gain employment. Unfortunately, when I talk to them about the proposed Luas E line, I have to tell them that we are talking about years, rather than weeks or months, and there is no funding pledged. There is also a significant lack of school infrastructure and despite what the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, told us last night when he trotted out the usual Government response about investment, our schools are facing serious situations where parents are queueing in September to get their children enrolled the following year. I know of teachers taking special needs classes in the corridor. I know of home school liaison officers who are doing their very best to deal with very sensitive issues in a shared space. It is unfair to the officer and very unfair to the children. It is true that there is more investment in schools, but we started out from a very low base and we have a rapidly expanding population of school going age. I am also aware of the problems facing universities. These are forced to depend more and more for their funding on corporate subscriptions. In effect, this is taking us away from the idea of the classical university and Deputy Higgins would certainly agree with me on that point. I am very aware of the many schools that have been left behind in my own constituency, due to the Government’s education policy. The management, staff and parents of Inchicore national school were given promises in 2001. They fulfilled their part of the bargain by joining the boys and girls schools together, but they are still waiting for that funding to be put in place. It is unfair to the teachers, the pupils and the parents. It is unfair to the whole community. I am meeting with representatives of Loreto College in Crumlin about the lack of a sports hall for which they applied years ago. Once again, there is no commitment and the Minister has not given us any idea if these projects will begin, not to mind when. I welcome today’s report from the ESRI, which stated that the fundamentals of the economy remain resilient. However, we are told to watch out for the next two to three years. The warning by the ESRI that society could miss the opportunity to plan for a better future in the next decade is very pertinent to this motion. The Government must seize the initiative and 410 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed) push the school building agenda to the forefront of the economy. The benefits of this are clear. Our children would have better facilities. We would help promote the knowledge economy for the next generation. We would also create employment for the construction workers who have been left jobless by the downturn in the economy. In the meantime, we should put in place a programme for upskilling and retraining of those people who are not out of jobs, particularly in the construction industry. Such investment would also help to stimulate the economy and we could show that politicians in this country have some vision and are able to make an investment which would pay dividends for years to come. Deputy Higgins last night spoke about our health service being an illness industry for clients, rather than a health service for treating patients. Once again, I have more than enough examples in my own constituency of where the whole health system is falling apart. The short- sighted decision to close down respite care in Cherry Orchard was finally reversed and we welcome that move. However, the issue of physiotherapy students was raised this morning in the Da´il. There is a crying need for physiotherapists. Physiotherapy graduates are coming out of colleges but there are no jobs for them, despite all the promises.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy: I wanted to raise some issues in my local area and bring them into the debate. In my constituency of Dublin Mid-West, there is a very significant unemployment problem. The Clondalkin social welfare office covers Clondalkin and Lucan. In the 12 months to 30 April 2008, the number of people on the live register at that office rose from 3,522 to 4,442, which is a 26% increase. Of that number, 1,193 or 27% are under 25. This compares to 21% unemployment for those under 25 in the State as a whole. The percentage of unemployed under 25 for the Dublin region is also 21%, which suggests that young people and school leavers in my constituency are finding it even more difficult to get jobs than their counterparts in other areas. In one particular electoral district in Clondalkin, 14% of young males are unemployed. In many parts of Clondalkin, unemployment is at 11%, which is over twice the national average. In Clondalkin, Tallaght and other parts of the country, unemployment figures have been rising for the past couple of years. There is a need for targeted intervention by the Government to address areas of high unemployment, including Clondalkin. South Dublin County Council recently passed a motion on the increase in the live register in Clondalkin and wrote to FA´ S about the issue. Officials from FA´ S wrote back with a few examples of specific measures taken by the body. A reference was made to local community training and employment programmes where a specific gap is identified. They mainly referred to steps to make new members of the live register aware of training and interview skill courses. Given the bad situation in local authority estates in north and south-west Clondalkin, that is just not good enough. We need a new commitment to innovative training and to education programmes that are aimed at unemployed people in specific areas. We need to use the physical accommodation available in some second level schools in the Clondalkin area and in Tallaght. We need to use the expertise that is available in the institutes of technology, such as ITT, as well 8 o’clock as the co-operation of employers to deliver focused, high-quality training and support to people who have lost jobs. There have been examples of this in the institute of technology, and I know that because my father worked there. ITT ran a programme with Hewlett Packard where unemployed people were trained for jobs at the company. It was very successful as many of those people were long-term unemployed. The Government needs a targeted approach. It needs to be more innovative and more proactive, as do agencies like FA´ S. Unfortunately, the Government has adopted a laissez-faire attitude towards unemployment. It is not good enough for people who lose their jobs to be told by FA´ S to look up websites and be given a few leaflets. We must do much more, getting 411 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Joanna Tuffy.] agencies involved and using colleges and second level schools to upskill people. I call for the implementation of the recommendations of the task force on lifelong learning. We must introduce incentives for people to study part time.

Deputy Sea´n Sherlock: In the past 24 hours we have heard much from the Government side about the ESRI report. If I were a construction worker or a manufacturing worker who had lost his job in the past three months, the ESRI report would not mean a whole pile to me. I would not be able to bring home the ESRI report on Thursday evening instead of a cheque and put it on the table to feed my family. The Government has engaged in a degree of spin on the issue in the past 24 hours. There is a state of denial on this issue. The Labour Party seeks to lobby the Government to examine this issue positively, take in hand certain aspects of the economy and re-jig its thinking on how to work our way out of the downturn, notwithstanding the potential long-term gains as outlined in the ESRI report. To arrest the decline in the construction industry the Government must come out in favour of infrastructural spending. It is not sufficient that the NRA and other agencies concentrate spending on interurban or intercity projects. The NRA must be adequately funded to develop road networks between towns, especially for secondary roads that are not better, in some instances, than boreens. If regional development, which should be a main plank of a country such as this, is to mean anything, then the national spatial strategy must be returned to the forefront of economic thinking. A typical hub town such as Mallow must benefit from Government policy that delivers infrastructure, as should towns such as Cobh, Youghal, Midleton and Fermoy. These towns have not benefitted from the boom except in the area of construction. Investment in the infrastructure of road networks, business and enterprise parks will encourage local economic growth. The Government must also find ways to take a punt on innovation. Given that we have \8 billion invested in property overseas we must find ways to claw this back and encourage those who invest in bricks and mortar overseas to take a chance on the commercialisation of technology. We must support venture capital and divert investment in bricks and mortar to innovation. On his website David McWilliams states that out of every \1 we borrowed in 2007, 86 cent went into property. Speculative investment in property, unlike other investment, creates no added value, no products, exports, patents, no skills and no basis for future national wealth. The Government’s recent announcement of \500 million funding is welcome but it must go further given the recent downturn we have encountered. Enterprise Ireland’s \60 million growth fund to support Ireland’s small and medium sized companies is minuscule given the potential in this sector. The cost base to small local family owned firms, through massive local authority charges, is a testament to the contempt in which this Government holds local authorities. Properly funded local authorities would mean fewer charges for business and more output locally. There must be a paradigm shift in thinking towards taking the burden of charges away from small businesses. For too long they have been a soft focus for the Government in terms of overcharging. The local economy will be the key to our future. This, along with entrepreneurial endeavour through knowledge, will sustain us. I call on the Government to acknowledge the potential for venture capital and greater investment in the millions of ideas outside these walls, waiting to come to fruition. For this to take hold, the Government must become an active stakeholder in the process. Section 23 type tax breaks that fuelled construction must now apply to the venture capital sphere, which fuels ideas, where the risks are higher but the potential for the economy in the long run is greater. 412 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

Deputy Leo Varadkar: I welcome the Labour Party motion tabled by Deputy Burton. It is timely, given that the economy is the most important issue before us. When I thought about what to say in this debate I decided to look back on some of the claims Members opposite made in the past year. It is interesting to do so in view of the first anniversary of the general election, which is Saturday week. The then Minister for Finance told us the economy was at its strongest for ten years, which does not seem to be the case now. Another told us we were heading for a soft landing in the housing sector, which is not the case now. The former Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment spoke of rebalancing in the economy, another spoke of welcome correction while the former Taoiseach spent a huge amount of time talking about international factors when he had given up on the housing downturn excuse. I am not sure where the Government stands on this. It seems to be a combination of deceit and denial. In the case of some it is denial that we are facing a serious economic downturn and potentially, if one believes Moore McDowell, a recession with negative economic growth in two consecutive quarters. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, told us on the radio this weekend that everything was fine and that the economy was growing faster than it was in Germany. I do not understand how an economy growing at less than 1%, 0% or potentially in recession can be growing faster than the economy of Germany. I do not know if that is ignorance on the part of certain Cabinet members, denial or deceit. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Lenihan, is the only Minister I have heard who accepts that we are facing a combination of factors, domestic and international. While we do not have control over international factors, we have considerable control over domestic factors. Any competent Minister must address these domestic factors. In fairness to the Minister opposite he is the only member of his party who accepts that. It is important to focus on three matters: the housing bubble, the loss of competitiveness and the public finances. There is no question that the Government must accept a large degree of responsibility for the housing bubble by not reforming stamp duty when it should have, by allowing easy mortgages and cheap credit to a greater extent than should have been the case, the cheerleading by the current Taoiseach of growth in prices in the housing market and mis- taken supply side economics, where Ministers increased spending and cut taxes by more than they should have, fuelling the economy and driving up prices, particularly housing prices. No one can ignore the series of national and international reports on the loss of competitiveness by the OECD, NCC and the World Economic Forum, which point to our failure in infrastructure and inflation, most of which is driven by Government services and badly regulated services rather than the private sector. The absence of reform in the public sector is another factor. We must urgently redress the public finances. It will not be an easy job for the Minister. While the economy is in choppy waters, the public finances are a sinking ship. We have gone from a \2 billion surplus to a projected borrowing requirement of \7 billion this year. That is the worst turnaround in the public finances in the history of the State. In general Government deficit figures we have gone from +2.3% of GDP in 2006 to −2.3% of GDP this year. This comes perilously close to the stability pact criteria. In respect of public spending, the former Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, increased current public spending, not capital spending, by 10.5% or 11% or twice the rate of economic growth. Anyone running a budget, small business or household can understand that is not sustainable. The past ten years have been a wasted decade, a boom that was squandered and a story of incompetence in economic management by Members opposite. It is important it is understood recovery is not guaranteed. We will only have the type of recovery spoken about by the ESRI 413 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Leo Varadkar.] in its recent report if the right policies are put in place and this means restoring competitiveness, taking climate change seriously, using social partnership to benefit taxpayers and consumers and not just vested interests and getting the public finances in order, which I hope the Minister will do quickly.

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am pleased to have an opportunity to contribute however briefly to this debate. Last evening, the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, outlined the Government’s outstanding record on the economy in recent years and the nature of the short and medium-term economic challenges which we face. He emphasised the fundamental strengths of the economy which will enable us to recover quickly from the current short- term setback and to resume normal growth rates. I do not wish to go over the same ground again but, it is important to reiterate a couple of key points. Since the mid-1990s the performance of the Irish economy has been astonishing and has resulted in average incomes beyond those in most other advanced countries. It has delivered huge increases in employment and has ended involuntary emigration. Unlike Deputy Varadkar, I do not see that as squandered years. As a result our economy is coming from a position of strength into this difficult and uncertain period. The strength of the economy is also underpinned by its flexibility and resilience echoed in the Economic and Social Research Institute’s most recent medium-term review published today. The ESRI acknowledges our sound economic and fiscal fundamentals. It points to our ability to absorb shocks in an efficient manner, to limit the economic fall-out and to return to the trend rate of growth fairly rapidly. The ESRI expects real growth in GDP of 0.75% per annum over the medium term, much higher than elsewhere in the euro area. In terms of the short-term outlook, I share the view of others that economic conditions this year and next year will be weak and that it will be 2010 before we are back to trend growth. There is no denying that our fiscal position has weakened from that envisaged at budget time with tax revenue some \736 million behind what was expected at end April. It is important to point out however that the current situation is manageable given the strong underlying position of the public finances, which will require to be closely managed. Notwithstanding this underlying strength, the Government is determined to take the right decisions on public expenditure. We cannot allow any unnecessary loosening of fiscal policy. Taking the wrong decisions now in dealing with short-term problems could have painful long- term consequences. This discipline on current expenditure under all headings will be critical during the next few years given the changed circumstances. Despite the constraints on the public finances the Government is determined to adhere to its priorities of protecting the weaker in society, delivering better and more effective public services, seeking value for money at all levels of public spending and continuing to invest heavily in our infrastructural development programme. The Government will do what is right but other economic stakeholders must also do so. We need to improve our competitiveness if our economy is to rebalance itself from relying on domestic activity to more sustainable export- led growth. This means employers will have to compete harder in domestic and export markets as there will be fewer opportunities to make easy profits. Pay expectations must take into account the more challenging economic and competitiveness scenario that we face and must recognise the need for improvements in productivity not alone in the private sector but in the public service. The allocation of resources to public service pay costs must not cause a shortfall of resources for other key priorities. Pay increases in the current talks cannot undermine our competitive position and must take account of the budgetary realities. 414 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

In addition to corrective action, if we are to keep our medium-term prospects bright, we need to reassert our rightful position at the heart of Europe through a “Yes” vote on the Lisbon treaty in June. I was unable to participate in the debate yesterday evening as I was meeting with Finance Ministers in the European Union yesterday and today. This morning, I took the opportunity of addressing the US Chamber of Commerce in Brussels. I was impressed with the concern and support right across the European Union for a “Yes” vote in Ireland. The volume of positive sentiment available to Ireland throughout the European Union will be damaged by a “No” vote. I thank the parties opposite whom I know are campaigning as vigorously as the Government for a “Yes” vote. On my return from Brussels this afternoon I saw a picture of Deputy Gilmore on Merrion Square. It may be some time before he gets further into Merrion Square but I thank him for his campaign in respect of the treaty which is important to all of us. It is important in terms of the signal we send to other European countries. Deputy Varadkar stated that much of the inflation is due to Government-led increases. This is not correct. Government charges are not a significant contributor in the increase in the rate of inflation. Government administered charges excluding independent regulators, account for one twenty-fifth of the total weighting of the basket of goods and services which make up the consumer price index.

Deputy Willie Penrose: I wish to share time with my party leader, Deputy Eamon Gilmore.

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

Deputy Willie Penrose: The stream of negative economic data on unemployment, inflation and tax revenues show clearly that the Celtic tiger era has come to an end and that the Govern- ment has no worthwhile policies to reverse these negative trends. It has been on auto-pilot so long it does not know what to do. Since the beginning of this year, consumer spending has slowed, unemployment has risen significantly, redundancies have risen to a level not seen since the 1980s, export growth has slowed, tax revenue has fallen and the fiscal deficit has risen sharply. Surveys of consumer confidence are at their lowest level since the series began. In the past year the numbers signing on for unemployment benefit have risen by 41,000, 28,000 of whom have become unemployed since the beginning of this year. Television is the most up to date and accurate barometer of what is happening in our economy and society. It is significant that RTE has decided to drop its “House hunters in the Sun” series and has instead during the past two weeks broadcast a sobering programme entitled “Where’s my job gone?” This illustrates the human cost of redundancies in manufacturing during the past year. The closure in my constituency of one of Westmeath’s longest established manufacturing plants, Iralco at Collinstown was only narrowly averted last month. Had it closed, the consequences for hundreds of families would have been disastrous and many of the firm’s older workers might not have worked again. The Government constantly tells us about the number of new jobs being created but most of these jobs are in high-tech manufacturing or in services. In rural areas, many workers lack the skills to take up such jobs and the decline in construction and low skill manufacturing is leaving many workers with few prospects of finding alternative jobs. While FA´ S does some good work in retaining workers, we have never developed in this country the kind of active labour market policies which have been so successful in Scandinavia in reducing long-term unemployment. While we have made impressive progress in educating our young people during the past 20 years, we must bear in mind that a large proportion of people in the labour force 415 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Willie Penrose.] aged over 40 years did not complete second level education and that half a million people in Ireland have literacy problems. We need a much better resourced and more proactive labour market policy if large numbers of older workers are not to be consigned to long-term unemployment and eventually reclassified as social welfare dependents. It is important to remember that many of the jobs lost during the past year were not in older manufacturing firms but in companies such as Pfizer, Boston Scientific, Abbott and Allergan which the Government repeatedly tells us are the industries where most manufacturing jobs will be created in the future. They were in fact the high technology, high value added jobs which we are constantly told are the alternative to low value added manufacturing jobs, most of which will inevitably move to low wage economies. We should recognise that the Celtic tiger period which began in 1994 ended six years ago in 2002. Deputy Quinn, as Minister for Finance at the time, played an important and pivotal role in ensuring the economy got on its feet. Growth from 1994 to 2002 was based on a tremendous growth in exports, which is the only sustainable way for a small open economy to grow. Since 2002, despite a lot of idle boasting by the Government about our economic performance, most of the growth has been due to a credit-fuelled housing boom, much of which is a pure bubble. This bubble has now largely burst due to rising interest rates, resulting from the credit and banking crisis and has caused a sharp downturn in housing starts. House starts are likely to continue falling for at least another year because of the large number of unsold new houses and apartments. If there is to be a recovery in the economy, it will not come from housing. The downturn in the housing market has resulted in a dramatic fall in tax revenue because during the past 15 years the Government has become overly dependent on tax from the construction of new houses and stamp duty on secondhand houses. Stamp duty which was never intended to be a major source of tax revenue has risen from 3% of total tax revenue to 9% since 1998. It must be bitterly ironic for the Government to recall former Deputy Michael McDowell’s assertion before the last election that the Government did not need the revenue from stamp duty. If stamp duty receipts were not falling so sharply, our new Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, would not have had to use the phrase “financial discipline” three times in his first interview as Minister. While I have a great deal more to say I must hand over to my party leader. As we no longer have control over exchange rate or monetary policy and have only limited opportunities for fiscal policy, we must rely on the competitiveness of our exports for growth and on competitiveness based on productivity. Increasing productivity must begin with the education system. Despite the economic downturn, spending on education, in particular on primary education, must be increased. We take too much comfort from surveys that show that Irish teenagers perform well in international comparisons of literacy but we ignore the results of the same surveys that show a mediocre performance in maths and science. If we are to produce workers for the so-called knowledge economy, we need to increase our spending on education and ensure all pupils achieve their potential.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I thank my colleague, Deputy Burton, for proposing this Labour Party motion. I thank all Members of the House for contributing to the debate. However, I regret somewhat the rather half-hearted engagement by the Government in this debate. It shows a lack of willingness on the part of Government to engage in the House on economic debate and have the Government’s economic policies subject to scrutiny. This motion deals with a core task of modern Government, namely, competent management of the economy. As leader of the Labour Party, I have always taken great care in what I state 416 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed) both at home and abroad about the Irish economy. I believe it is never wise for any of us to talk down our economic prospects. I also believe the Irish economy has significant underlying strengths which can outlast the present short-term difficulties. In this context, I welcome the ESRI medium-term review, which sets out a positive picture for the decade ahead, despite short-term problems. As the economist John Maynard Keynes stated, “In the long run we are all dead”. The people of Ireland live in the here and now. We need jobs and a decent standard of living right now, and we need to know that the Government is capable of managing the transition from where we are now to the rosier days that may be further down the line. What bothers me about the ESRI report is not so much its content but rather that the Government will seize on it as another excuse for complacency and inaction on the economy. Last night, Deputy Burton went through many of the facts about the Irish economy at present and the extent to which a downturn is taking place. That we are in an economic downturn is not in dispute. The core questions that must be addressed are what is causing it, what to do about it and who carries the cost of it. How do we get through the present difficulties to exploit the opportunities described in the medium-term review? After all, economic forecasting is not a form of soothsaying. Economic forecasts are of their nature conditional and significant conditions are attached to the prospect of getting from where we are now to where we want to be. On the first question, let us nail the myth that all of our current difficulties are somehow imposed on us from outside. Let us stop blaming somebody else. There is a crisis in global capital markets. Serious threats to the Irish economy arise from the credit crunch and from the appreciation in our real exchange rate consequent on the rise in sterling and the dollar. Inflationary pressures arise from the increase in global commodity prices, not least the cost of basic foods. However, the slowdown in economic activity that Ireland is now experiencing is the direct result of the collapse in a domestically-generated construction boom over which the new Taoiseach presided as Minister for Finance. Moreover, a pattern of rising costs and deteriorating cost competitiveness has been evident for some time, just as merchandise export performance has been weak for some time. As a result, the Irish economy now faces into the changed global conditions of which I spoke in a disadvantageous position. The property market is central to what has been happening in recent months. For years, the Labour Party has warned the Government that its refusal to address the house price spiral would eventually cause severe problems. However, it ignored these warnings and allowed both job creation and Exchequer revenues to be overly dependent on construction. It made a complete mess of the stamp duty issue, allowing one Minister to propose the abolition of the tax, then refusing to address it, then addressing it in a half-hearted manner and then coming back six months later for another bite at the cherry. It is little wonder that buyers fled the property market. Activity remains very low, as buyers wait to see when prices will bottom out. The result of this crisis of confidence has been a collapse in residential housing starts, with knock-on consequences for jobs and tax revenues. What can be done about this situation? I believe the Government faces a genuine policy dilemma. As the ESRI medium-term review makes clear, its pro-cyclical approach to fiscal policy in the boom times means it has nothing left in the armoury when things are not going so well. The fiscal position is deteriorating and sooner or later the public finances will have to be restored to a more sustainable path. At the same time, precipitate action on the part of the Government at this point risks making matters worse, potentially lengthening and deepening the downturn. 417 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Eamon Gilmore.]

I have no intention of making the political aspects of this balancing act any more difficult for the Government. However, as I will spell out in the moment, neither will I stay silent if the burden of adjustment is imposed where Fianna Faíl and the PDs generally impose it. There are significant problems in fiscal policy, but this does not mean that the Government is impo- tent. Important supply-side steps can be taken and measures can be taken without exposing the Exchequer to undue risk to lessen the immediate impact of the construction slowdown. In particular, it is important that people who are losing their jobs, particularly in construction and manufacturing, are able to avail of suitable educational and reskilling opportunities. Other- wise, we will see a build-up of people on the live register who will find it difficult to move back into employment when the economic environment improves. It is important to bear in mind that employment in construction increased by 100,000 between 2001 and 2006. Many of those people were migrants, but many were not. I am particularly concerned that construction may have been providing reasonably well-paid employment for people with very limited skills, who will now find it very difficult to find work. What can be done is to provide training opportunities for people who are leaving the house- building sector to facilitate them finding work in other areas of construction and in the broader economy. Given the scandalously poor building standards in force for most of the boom, there is plenty of work to be done in retrofitting Irish homes to meet better carbon standards and the Government should take the opportunity to train people for this type of work. It is also important to cushion the immediate blow to employment in the construction sector so as to smooth the adjustment path to lower output levels in house building. The skills involved in building houses are very similar to those involved in building schools, particularly where a small number of classrooms is being added. The Government has been promising since 1997 to provide every Irish child with a world-class school, yet we know it has utterly failed to do so. Now that there is spare capacity in the construction sector, the State has an opportunity to avail of more competitive tender prices and deal with a long-running educational need. All that is required is a little imagination and some administrative agility. Instead of paying people to be on the live register, we should get people to work building schools that are urgently needed. I also believe that now is a good time to introduce a “begin to buy” shared equity scheme in housing as suggested by the Labour Party some time ago. House prices may well have dropped, but people still need homes and cannot afford to buy them. Introducing a shared equity scheme has the potential to restore some level of the lost activity in the housing market. Again, this is an opportunity to obtain better value for money for the taxpayer and for people who want to own their own home. The financial markets will not step into this breach, because the banks are anxious to curtail their exposure to the property sector. However, the State can take a longer-term view. In the short term, it is not hard to predict what the Government is likely to do. Up to now, it has adhered to the Corporal Jones school of economics, shouting “Don’t panic, don’t panic” in ever more nervous tones and doing nothing. It has not brought forward a single constructive policy idea, and it is clear from the Government amendment that is has no intention of doing so. It will, I hope, stay the course in maintaining high levels of investment though it can afford to be flexible about the composition of that investment. However, this is not an adequate response to the needs of the moment. Managing the transition from a short-term downturn to a medium-term growth path is a key policy challenge which will not be met by the usual response of blaming somebody else. What the Government should not do is revert to form and impose the full burden of adjustment on to the weakest in our society. We have been here before. We know the pattern — cuts in health services and in 418 Irish Economy: 14 May 2008. Motion (Resumed) home help hours, the “savage 16” welfare cuts championed by the present Tańaiste and cuts in active labour market programmes, all the while maintaining tax breaks for the wealthy and the well-connected to which Fianna Faíl is addicted. Let me be quite clear. The Government should not come into the House looking for sacrifices from hard working people and their families and from the vulnerable in our society while maintaining stamp duty holidays for wealthy property developers. If social partnership is to mean anything, it means those who have done best out of the boom can afford to take a fair share of the burden of the adjustment. I hope the motion, notwithstanding the likely outcome of the division on the Government amendment, will at least cause the Government to focus more attentively and actively on what needs to be done to address the new economic problems we face.

Amendment put.

The Da´il divided: Ta´, 65; Nı´l, 62.

Ta´

Andrews, Chris. Kennedy, Michael. Ardagh, Seań. Killeen, Tony. Aylward, Bobby. Kitt, Tom. Behan, Joe. Lenihan, Brian. Blaney, Niall. Lenihan, Conor. Brady, A´ ine. Lowry, Michael. Brady, Cyprian. Mansergh, Martin. Brady, Johnny. McDaid, James. Brennan, Seámus. McEllistrim, Thomas. Browne, John. McGrath, Finian. Byrne, Thomas. McGrath, Mattie. Calleary, Dara. McGrath, Michael. Carey, Pat. McGuinness, John. Collins, Niall. Moloney, John. Conlon, Margaret. Moynihan, Michael. Connick, Seań. Mulcahy, Michael. Coughlan, Mary. O´ Fearghaı´l, Seań. Cregan, John. O’Dea, Willie. Cuffe, Ciarań. O’Hanlon, Rory. Cullen, Martin. O’Keeffe, Batt. Devins, Jimmy. O’Keeffe, Edward. Dooley, Timmy. O’Rourke, Mary. Finneran, Michael. O’Sullivan, Christy. Fleming, Seań. Roche, Dick. Flynn, Beverley. Ryan, Eamon. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Sargent, Trevor. Gogarty, Paul. Scanlon, Eamon. Grealish, Noel. Smith, Brendan. Haughey, Seań. Treacy, Noel. Healy-Rae, Jackie. Wallace, Mary. Hoctor, Maíre. White, Mary Alexandra. Kelleher, Billy. Woods, Michael. Kelly, Peter.

Nı´l

Breen, Pat. Coveney, Simon. Broughan, Thomas P. Crawford, Seymour. Bruton, Richard. Creighton, Lucinda. Burke, Ulick. D’Arcy, Michael. Burton, Joan. Deasy, John. Byrne, Catherine. Deenihan, Jimmy. Carey, Joe. Doyle, Andrew. Connaughton, Paul. Durkan, Bernard J. Coonan, Noel J. Enright, Olwyn. Costello, Joe. Feighan, Frank. 419 Cancer Screening 14 May 2008. Programme

Nı´l—continued

Ferris, Martin. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Flanagan, Charles. O’Donnell, Kieran. Flanagan, Terence. O’Dowd, Fergus. Gilmore, Eamon. O’Keeffe, Jim. Hayes, Brian. O’Mahony, John. Hayes, Tom. O’Shea, Brian. Higgins, Michael D. O’Sullivan, Jan. Hogan, Phil. Penrose, Willie. Howlin, Brendan. Quinn, Ruairı´. Lynch, Ciarań. Rabbitte, Pat. Lynch, Kathleen. Reilly, James. McCormack, Pa´draic. Ring, Michael. McEntee, Shane. Sheehan, P.J. McGinley, Dinny. Sherlock, Seań. McHugh, Joe. Stagg, Emmet. McManus, Liz. Stanton, David. Mitchell, Olivia. Timmins, Billy. Naughten, Denis. Tuffy, Joanna. Neville, Dan. Upton, Mary. Noonan, Michael. Varadkar, Leo. O´ Caolaín, Caoimhghıń.

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

Amendment declared carried.

Question, “That the motion, as amended, be agreed to”, put and declared carried.

Adjournment Debate.

————

Cancer Screening Programme. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I am delighted to have the opportunity to raise this issue on the Adjournment and I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to do so. Over the next couple of weeks, Limerick will be the only city in Ireland without BreastCheck in place. Since 1 March 2008, the brest clinic in Limerick Regional Hospital no longer carries out screening mammography and only carries out symptomatic mammography. With screening mammography, women in the 50 to 64 year age group were screened for breast cancer. Due to the closure of the breast unit in Barringtons Hospital and the unit in Ennis, the Mid-West Regional Hospital finds itself under severe pressure in terms of resources to simply deal with symptomatic mammography. Professor Tom Keane decided that the unit in Limerick would be designated for symptomatic cases and would no longer provide screening mammography. This decision was made on the understanding that screening mammographies would fall under the auspices of BreastCheck. However, there is no date for the roll-out of BreastCheck in Limerick. BreastCheck is already in place in Dublin, the east, the midlands, the north east and the south east. Since December it has been operating in Cork and Galway. The service will be available in Waterford in the next number of weeks but it is still not available in Limerick, even though the numbers of women aged between 50 and 64 are well in excess of those in Waterford and many other areas. The CSO population statistics for 2006 indicate that Limerick has a female population of 10,178 between the ages of 50 and 59. It is an absolute disgrace that BreastCheck has not been rolled out in Limerick. 420 Cancer Screening 14 May 2008. Programme

I note that the Minister for Health and Children is not here tonight, which is not unusual. It merely demonstrates her lack of commitment to health in general and cancer treatment in particular. I wish to put some startling statistics on the record. Of every 1,000 mammograms carried out, 5.3 indicate the presence of breast cancer. There are 1,800 breast cancer cases per year in Ireland, of which 134 are in the mid-west. Perhaps the most horrifying figure is that one in 12 Irish women develops breast cancer. We have a death rate of 36%, which is the fourth highest out of 25 developed countries, according to the World Health Organisation. Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer after skin cancer. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan, the Acting Chairman, knows the situation in Limerick well. There is no screening programme in place in the county. I have telephoned BreastCheck but cannot get a definite answer as to when the service will be rolled out in Limerick. The women of Limerick fall under the static BreastCheck service in Cork but are to be served by a mobile digital mammography unit which must be put in place as matter of urgency. The Minister for Health and Children stands indicted that this service has not been put in place before now. Before the screening mammography service was discontinued in March of this year, there was a four month waiting list for screening mammographies for private patients and a one year waiting list for public patients. Now there are women aged between 50 and 64 in the Limerick area who — based on rumours we have heard that BreastCheck will not be rolled out for at least another 18 to 28 months — could be waiting over three years for a screening mammography test. This is completely unacceptable, particularly given the fact that BreastCheck recommends that a mammography be carried out every two years. I want the Minister to indicate tonight when BreastCheck will be rolled out in Limerick and, until such time as the service is rolled out, the interim measures she will put in place to ensure that the women of Limerick and the mid-west are able to avail of screening mammography services. If such measures are not put in place, women’s lives will be at risk, which is completely unacceptable. I await the Minister’s response and hope we will be hearing news that BreastCheck will be rolled out in Limerick as a matter of urgency and that the women of Limerick and the mid-west will not be discriminated against any longer.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. I welcome the opportunity to address the issues raised by the Deputy and to set out the current position regarding mammography services in Limerick Regional Hospital and the roll-out of BreastCheck. The HSE has designated Limerick Regional Hospital and University College Hospital Galway as the two cancer centres in the managed cancer control network for the HSE western region, which includes County Limerick. The HSE has advised the Department that breast imaging services are available at the Mid- Western Regional Hospital, Limerick, through a breast clinic which provides rapid access for all women with breast disease symptoms. Mammography scheduling is based on clinical need and referrals to the breast clinic are assessed, prioritised and subsequently referred to the radiology department for imaging. Urgent referrals to the breast clinic for mammography are usually carried out within two weeks. Non-urgent cases are placed on a waiting list. It is important that clear criteria are applied to distinguish between urgent and routine cases. Significant work has already been undertaken in the area of symptomatic breast disease services, supported by the Irish College of General Practitioners, regarding referral criteria and the development of appropriate referral forms to allow for appropriate triage of urgent and non-urgent cases.

421 Cancer Screening 14 May 2008. Programme

[Deputy Sea´n Haughey.]

The symptomatic breast service has traditionally provided 11 appointments per week to enable GPs to refer asymptomatic women, that is, women who do not have symptoms for screening mammograms. At present the waiting list associated with this service is up to 24 months. The service has recently been withdrawn in order to prioritise mammogram slots for the imaging of women presenting with symptoms. The HSE has advised the Department that this is the best use of the resources made available by the national cancer control programme. The implementation of the national quality assurance standards for symptomatic breast disease will ensure that every woman in Ireland who develops breast cancer has an equal opportunity to be managed in a centre which is capable of delivering the best possible results. The BreastCheck programme delivers screening to women in their local community through the use of static and mobile screening units. The 4% of women who need follow-on treatment receive it at one of the four BreastCheck static units located in the western, southern and eastern regions. The BreastCheck programme is designed to offer repeat screening to the eligible population, that is, women aged 50 to 64, within an interval of 21 to 27 months. BreastCheck recently became the first national screening service provider worldwide to offer a fully digital mammography service and women in the mid-west will be screened from a mobile digital screening unit. The mobile unit will remain in an area until all women known to the programme have been offered a mammogram. This time period varies from county to county based on the numbers of women to be screened and uptake levels. The roll-out to individual counties, including County Limerick, will be dictated by BreastCheck’s management and operational considerations. The estimated total screening population in County Limerick is 12,976. Undoubtedly, the development of the country’s cancer services can provide the most effective testimony to how change driven by quality and safety can result in faster access to better services with best outcomes for the patient. We are now well into the initial stages of delivering a model of service for cancer care which will have all the characteristics of the modern and effective systems enjoyed by other developed countries, not least better outcomes for patients.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: That does not answer my question. The reply does not indicate when BreastCheck will be rolled out. It is a disgrace that the Minister for Health and Children is not in the House tonight.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter. I refer to the Le Che´ile Educate Together school at Mornington, the official address of which is County Louth, although the school is actually in County Meath. On a technical 9 o’clock point, it is in Drogheda, County Meath. It is a very successful national school. The enrolment next year is expected to be 366. The school is seven years old, multi-denominational and doing extremely well. It has the support of parents from far and near. However, the school has no fixed buildings and consists of all prefabs. Children who are now seven years old will be leaving a primary school which has only prefabricated buildings. A site is available and the teaching staff are excellent. Currently, the waiting list for next autumn has 183 applicants for 56 places on a first come basis and 197 children are already on the waiting list for the following year. This is a school in great need. The teaching staff have been very supportive of all the children. It is not acceptable that a decision has not been reached on a design team for the school. The advertisement has been published in the EU Journal with a closing date of 13 February, 422 Cancer Screening 14 May 2008. Programme three months ago but no progress has been reported. Is it a fact that the submissions lie unopened on the desk of the Minister for Education and Science and that the design team may never be appointed unless those envelopes are opened and the quotations are examined? A 16-classroom school has been agreed. Everything is working well for this school but they have no building. Those of us who have been teachers know that prefabricated classrooms are too hot in summer and too cold in winter. This is a most inefficient and ineffective way of running a school. These prefabricated classrooms have been rented for almost seven years and this is a waste of money. The parents, teachers, students and principal want to know the current position regarding the appointment of the design team which should have been announced on 1 May. The former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Mary Hanafin, visited the school recently so before she left her desk to go to the Department of Social and Family Affairs she knew exactly what was the situation regarding the school. The parents, teachers and the students are demanding action from the Minister of State tonight.

Deputy Seań Haughey: I thank the Deputy for raising this matter as it provides me with the opportunity to outline to the House the Government’s strategy for capital investment in education projects and also to outline the current position in relation to the building project proposed for Le Cheíle Educate Together national school, Mornington Road, Drogheda. The modernisation of facilities in approximately 3,200 primary and 730 post-primary schools is not an easy task given the legacy of decades of under-investment in this area as well as the need to respond to emerging needs in areas of rapid population growth. Nonetheless, the Government has shown a consistent determination to improve the condition of our school buildings and to ensure that the appropriate facilities are in place to enable the implementation of a broad and balanced curriculum. The Government has dramatically increased investment in the school building programme from just over \90 million back in 1997 to almost \600 million this year. Under the lifetime of the national development plan, almost \4.5 billion will be invested in schools. This is an unprecedented level of capital investment which reflects the commitment of the Government to continue its programme of sustained investment in primary and post-primary schools. As the Deputy may be aware, a developing areas unit was set up recently in the Department to focus on the school accommodation needs of rapidly developing areas. The main emphasis in 2008 is on providing sufficient school places in these developing areas, as well as delivering improvements in the quality of existing primary and post-primary school accommodation throughout the country. The Le Cheíle Educate Together project has advanced to the stage where the Department has agreed the schedule of accommodation for a new 16-classroom school. The site required for the new school has now been acquired and the process of appointing a design team has commenced. The Department published the advertisement seeking qualified consultants on the public procurement website in January 2008. These pre-qualification questionnaires have been received in the Department for assessment and the Department will be in contact with the school authorities on this matter as soon as possible.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd: When will that be?

Deputy Sea´n Haughey: As soon as possible. In the interim period, pending the provision of a new school building, the Department has approved the rental of one further temporary classroom for this school for September 2008 to cater for its immediate accommodation needs. 423 Schools 14 May 2008. Recognition

[Deputy Sea´n Haughey.] In addition, the Department also funded grant aid of approximately \394,000 for the provision of adequate car-parking facilities for this school. I thank the Deputy for raising this matter.

Schools Recognition. Deputy Joan Burton: I am delighted to have the opportunity to raise the urgent need for the new Minister for Education and Science to recognise the proposed Educate Together school in Dublin 15. This school is supported by hundreds of parents as the school of choice for their children in the Carpenterstown and Luttrellstown area of Dublin 15. Many of these parents have experienced great frustration in getting a place for their children in a local school. The previous Minister for Education and Science, in a change from long-standing education policy, refused recognition for this school. I urge the new Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, to review as a matter of urgency the intense demand from parents for the recognition of their school. The former Minister for Education and Science refused the application because of her wish to pilot a new VEC-sponsored primary school in the area. The Minister chose to ignore the advice of the new schools advisory committee which recommended recognition of this Educate Together school. There is a legally binding agreement between the Department of Education and Science and Educate Together, dating back to 12 July 2000, that the Department would retain a further reserved school site for Educate Together in return for the Castleknock Educate Together school agreeing, at the time, to move to a Department-owned site at Beechpark Avenue. Edu- cate Together accepted this arrangement in good faith but expected to proceed in time with a further school in the Carpenterstown area to serve the huge population of children in the area along with other schools, such as a further local primary school, St. Patrick’s, which is now open and will have close to 1,000 pupils quite soon. The Department of Education has planning permission for a 16-classroom school in the area in Porterstown. This is on a site which could easily accommodate two schools during the start-up phase as happened in Adamstown. According to the Constitution, the Department of Education and Science must respect par- ental choice in respect of schools where this is expressed. There is no doubt that a sufficient number of parents in the area have chosen a multi-denominational Educate Together school for their children. I understand that the appeal for the recognition of Carpenterstown Educate Together school will be heard shortly. The new Minister has an opportunity to gain an immense amount of goodwill from parents in the area. I believe that if he reviews the case for recognising Carpen- terstown Educate Together school, he will concur with the recommendation of the new schools advisory committee and recognise the school. Educate Together has an established 30-year record of facilitating parents who want multi- denominational education for their children, from all backgrounds, Irish and international. Educate Together, as with all other schools in Dublin 15, Catholic and Church of Ireland and Gaelscoileanna, take children from all backgrounds and from all nationalities. I note the Mini- ster of State with responsibility for integration policy is present in the Chamber. I believe it is important that we have integrated education at primary level of all the children who live in Dublin 15. We do not want schools that are for international children only, as was the disastrous policy of the previous Minister for Education and Science. With many others I welcomed the announcement by the previous Minister that the VEC might be involved in primary education and would be established as a patron of primary education but that should not come at the expense of the right of Educate Together to continue as a patron of new primary schools. The ball is in the Minister’s court. The previous Minister for Education and Science got it wrong. The consequences are that in Balbriggan and in Scoil Choilm there are schools where there 424 Schools 14 May 2008. Recognition are only international children. Educate Together has a proven track record of educating children together of all faiths and none and of children from all backgrounds, whether Irish or international. All our local traditional parish primary schools in Dublin West do that as well and do it superbly. The former Minister for Education and Science chose not to know the situation. There is an opportunity for the new Minister for Education and Science to open out to the parents, who are desperate for a school for their children. I urge the new Minister for Education and Science to avail of the opportunity to revisit the issue and grant recognition to this important school project.

Deputy Sea´n Haughey: I thank the Deputy for raising this matter and for giving me the opportunity to outline to the House the actions being taken by the Department to address the school accommodation needs of the Porterstown, Carpenterstown, Clonsilla areas of Dublin 15. The Minister is conscious that the Dublin 15 area as a whole is one of the most rapidly developing areas in the country and, as a result, there has been a marked increase in the demand for primary school places. The Department is taking a number of measures to increase the capacity of existing schools in the area concerned along with the development of new schools to meet this growing demand. All building projects arising from these interventions are awarded a band 1 priority rating under the Department’s prioritisation criteria for large scale building projects to ensure they are delivered as expeditiously as possible. With particular reference to the Porterstown, Carpenterstown, Clonsilla areas a number of interventions have been made to ensure adequate school provision. There are currently three schools that serve the area. St. Patrick’s national school moved into a new 24 classroom school last year. This school facilitates an annual three stream intake. St. Mochta’s national school was expanded in 2006 to cater for an annual four stream intake. An extension to cater for this development has been progressed to architectural planning. School planning section liaised closely with the local authority and the two schools serving the area and determined that up to an additional 90 children would require junior places for September 2007. In that context a further school, Scoil Choilm, was opened in Diswellstown, Dublin 15 under the temporary patronage of the Catholic Church in September 2007 and enrolled three streams of junior infants. The school is temporarily accommodated in the Institute of Horology, VEC owned building, in Blanchardstown. Transport has been made available given the age of the children involved. The school will be relocated to an off-site constructed school on a temporary 2.5 acre site on the Porterstown Road from September 2008. In relation to the Carpenterstown Educate Together parents group that has been established, an application for recognition of a new school in Carpenterstown in September 2008 was received by the new schools advisory committee. The new schools advisory committee is an independent advisory group established to process applications for the recognition of new primary schools and to make recommendations to the Minister. In the course of assessing the application from Carpenterstown Educate Together, the new schools advisory committee took cognisance of all of the factors and were of the view that the proposed new school met the normal criteria for the recognition of new schools and made their recommendation to the Minister in this regard. In recognising a new school, cognisance needs to be given to the demand on resources so that the State can ensure efficiency and equity in the allocation of constrained resources. In that context, given the significant additional levels of primary school provision made in the area in the past two to three years, the Minister was satisfied that sufficient provision had been made to serve the current and future population of the area in the medium term, and that appropriate diversity of provision has also been provided. On that basis, recognition was not 425 Asylum Support 14 May 2008. Services

[Deputy Sea´n Haughey.] granted to Educate Together project on this occasion and this does not preclude recognition of this school in the future. Educate Together lodged a number of other notifications of intention to apply for the recognition of new schools for next September with the new schools advisory committee and 11 new Educate Together schools across the country have been granted provisional recognition from September 2008 including four new Educate Together schools in Dublin. I assure the Deputy that all options were considered to ensure that there are sufficient school places in September 2008. Based on the pre-enrolment data to hand, there will be surplus school places in the area in September 2008. Due to the anticipated continuing level of demand for school places in the Dublin 15 area, the need to make further provision at primary level in addition to that outlined is being kept under continuous review by my Department. Any proposed new school not granted recognition is entitled to appeal this decision if it considers that the criteria and procedures for the recognition of new primary schools have been improperly or inappropriately applied in its case. I understand that an appeal, in the case of the proposed Carpenterstown Educate Together school, has recently been lodged and this will be considered shortly. I thank the Deputy for allowing me the opportunity to outline the Department’s position on school provision in this area.

Asylum Support Services. Deputy Jimmy Deenihan: Tralee Refugee Support Services has been working with asylum seekers and refugees since 2001 when the drop-in centre was first established. The need for the drop-in centre was identified through research into the needs of asylum seekers carried out by Partnership Tralee in early 2001. There are three direct provision accommodation centres in Tralee which are home to almost 300 asylum seekers. One third of this number is made up of families, two thirds are men, often referred to in the system as “single males”, whereas in fact the majority have spouses and children in their home countries. Asylum seekers have been living in Tralee for the past eight years and inevitably some have secured refugee status. There are no official statistics of the number of refugees in Tralee as the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform does not track people once they secure refugee status. However, because Tralee Refugee Support services has worked continuously with asylum seekers for the past seven years, based on its knowledge it estimates that there are about 70 refugee families living in Tralee. The centre also supports and provides services to those previously in the asylum system who got residency under the Irish born child scheme in 2005. There are about 70 to 80 families with IBC residency in Tralee. As the only immigrant support organisation in Tralee, the centre also provides services and support to migrant workers from both EU and non-EU countries. In addition to three part-time and one full-time paid staff members, the centre also has at any one time a core of about 15 volunteers who assist on an ongoing basis with different aspects of the work the centre carries out. This is in addition to the eight management committee members. The centre also has occasional volunteers who help with events or specific projects. Among its daily activities the centre provides an integrated information, advocacy and support service to asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants primarily in the greater Tralee area, but with referrals also being received from west and north Kerry. In 2007 alone it provided almost 5,000 one-to-one supports for 1,000 asylum seekers, refugees and other immigrants. This number has increased every year since the centre opened in 2001. In 2007, it had 69 different 426 Asylum Support 14 May 2008. Services nationalities accessing the centre representing countries throughout Africa, Asia, Europe and South America. Tralee Refugee Support Services operates a drop-in centre as a resource for asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants in the greater Tralee area. Education and training, particularly in English language, literacy and computer skills is a key resources it offers asylum seekers and refugees. It does so in co-operation with the Kerry education service and the education officer of Partnership Tralee. In 2007, it provided training in English, literacy and computers for 150 asylum seekers and refugees. With funding from the HSE south region, the centre operates a family support service for up to 30 asylum seeker families in the Johnston Marina direct provision accommodation centre. It continues to support families when they secure refugee status and helps with the transition from the asylum system to residency in the local community. Some of the local and regional agencies with which the centre works closely include the HSE south region fostering, community work and social work departments, the local GP practice nurses association, Tralee citizen information service and Tralee homeless information centre. The Tralee refugee support services centre has submitted its applications to the European Refugee Fund, ERF, and European Fund for the Integration of Third Country Nationals, EIF, in partnership with the Garda Sı´ocha´na in the town. It has developed a strong working relationship with the Garda, which has been of mutual benefit to the immigrant community and Garda. The centre had hoped funding under the ERF and EIF would have enabled it to develop this work as a unique and innovative project with potential to be replicated nationally. The Tralee refugee support service supports more than 1,000 immigrants annually, including asylum seekers, refugees, Irish-born child residents and migrant workers. Given that these vulnerable immigrants and their needs will not disappear, how will their needs be met if the centre is forced to close? The service has more than proved its worth over the past seven years, both with client groups and other local and national voluntary and statutory organisations. It now faces closure from next week after seven years unless the Minister intervenes. I understand EIF funding was not provided to any project in the south west region. Why is this the case? The total amount of grants made available under the ERF and EIF does not appear to add up to the total amount allocated. Are there moneys outstanding? Is more money available from Europe? I welcome the Minister of State and I am pleased he has come to the House to respond to the issue I raise.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Conor Lenihan): I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. Tralee refugee support services was allocated funding of \160,420 from the European Refugee Fund, amounting to 50% of a total project cost of \320,840, which was programmed for payment over the years 2006 and 2007. The purpose of the European Refugee Fund is to support and encourage the efforts made by member states in receiving and bearing the consequences of receiving refugees and displaced persons by providing financing for measures relating to the conditions for reception and asylum procedures and the integration of persons whose stay is of a lasting and-or stable nature. The fund is a co-funding instrument, that is, applicants may apply for funding of up to 50% maximum of the total cost required for completion of a project. Applicants must be able to secure the balance of funding from matching funders, that is, other sources. Support under the European Refugee Fund is linked to the specific purposes of the fund and the purpose of grants awarded under it is not to fund the ongoing operation of an organisation but rather to provide a level of co-financing to that organisation to undertake specific actions particular to this fund. Moneys from the European Refugee Fund are issued each year 427 The 14 May 2008. Adjournment

[Deputy Conor Lenihan.] in a series of payments, subject to the application of the various detailed and complex rules of eligibility of expenditure issued by the European Commission. On examination of the financial returns submitted in respect of 2006, Tralee refugee support services was found to be entitled to a reduced overall allocation of \61,890.78, of which the final instalment of \6,083 was paid to the group at the end of April this year. Any discrepancy between the grant awarded and the payments made from the fund arise due to the verification process required by the fund. Tralee refugee support services has also been paid a total of \64,168 in respect of 2007 in two instalments of \40,105 and \24,063 in March and October 2007, respectively. A final payment may be due when all the necessary documentation has been forwarded to my Department. These payments are subject to verification and may be amended when the financial returns for 2007 are examined. Such an amendment may occur if the expenditure concerned does not comply with the various rules of eligibility of expenditure issued by the European Commission. The group concerned has not yet submitted final documentation in respect of expenditure for 2007. It has been engaged in ongoing discussions with officials of my Department who have visited this group on a number of occasions to assist it in the preparation of the necessary documentation. My office also extended the deadline for receipt of such documents to the close of business on 9 May 2008. I understand Tralee refugee support services has been in touch by telephone with my officials and has undertaken to forward all outstanding documentation early this week. I am supportive of the role of voluntary bodies in providing services to refugees and asylum seekers. The relevant European Commission rules concerning the administration of the Euro- pean Refugee Fund are applied to the maximum possible benefit of such organisations. With regard to future funding from the European Refugee Fund and the European Fund for the Integration of Third Country Nationals, known as the European Integration Fund for short, which commenced this year, the position is that Pobal, on behalf of my office, sought applications for proposals for funding from the voluntary-NGO sector and partnership companies under each of these funds. The closing date for receipt of applications for funding was 25 January 2008. Pobal has recently notified the various applicant bodies as to whether they have been successful in their applications. I understand in this regard that Tralee refugee support services was not successful in its applications to either fund. It is open to the group to appeal these decisions to Pobal and its appeals will be dealt with independently by different officials within that organisation. It is likely there will be further calls for proposals in respect of these funds, which will be advertised later this year. This will allow Tralee refugee support services and other unsuccessful groups an opportunity to re-evaluate their proposals before submitting new applications. I draw the attention of this House to the recent statement on integration strategy and diversity management entitled “Migration Nation” published by my office recently. This statement sets out my policy strategy over the next number of years and my commitment to achieving the provision of adequate funding streams for integration projects. In this regard, the new integration policy focuses on the role of local communities, local authorities, sporting bodies, faith-based groups and political parties in building integrated communities from the ground up.

The Da´il adjourned at 9.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 15 May 2008.

428 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Written Answers.

————————

The following are questions tabled by Members for written response and the ministerial replies as received on the day from the Departments [unrevised].

————————

Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, answered orally.

Questions Nos. 7 to 74, inclusive, resubmitted.

Questions Nos. 75 to 84, inclusive, answered orally.

Departmental Applications. 85. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the steps she is taking to improve her Department’s application processing times and overall customer service performance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18618/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): My Department is committed to providing a quality service to all its customers. This includes ensuring that applications are processed and that decisions on entitlement are made as quickly as possible. The staff and other resources available to the Department are regularly reviewed having regard to the workload arising and other competing demands. The available resources are then deployed to discharge the Department’s obligations towards its customers and in implementing cost effective controls to prevent and detect fraud and abuse. The processing of applications under any of the schemes operated by the Department can require the collection and assessment of a complex range of information in relation to a variety of factors including means, medical condition, domestic and EU contributions and other criteria. This can involve medical assessments by the Department’s medical assessors of applicants; the verification of information provided through home visits by social welfare inspectors, correspondence and evidence from other EU jurisdictions, all of which add to the processing time required to ensure that the terms of the scheme are correctly administered. In addition the timescales in processing applications for some of the Department’s schemes have been influenced by increases in the numbers of claims being submitted. Measures introduced by the Department to address the efficiency of claim processing include the following: 429 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

• Review of existing processes and procedures on an ongoing basis with the explicit objective of reducing delays in claim processing;

• Prioritising claim renewals to ensure continuity of payments;

• Review of ongoing staffing requirements in light of the increased volumes of claims in certain areas;

• The judicious application of overtime working;

• Recruitment of temporary staff where appropriate, to reduce or eliminate the backlogs;

• Introduction of scanning technology in certain areas, to update details directly from claim forms to computer systems, will enable further streamlining of claim processing.

These measures will, over time, lead to more efficient processing and reduce the number of claims on hand. The position is being closely monitored and kept under review by my Department.

Pension Provisions. 86. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has assessed the impact of stock market losses on the robustness of pension provision; and if there are implications for public policy. [15682/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Funding Standard provided for in the Pensions Act 1990, measures the solvency of defined benefit pension schemes. Generally speaking, this requires that pension schemes have sufficient assets to discharge their liabilities in the event that the scheme is wound up. Schemes are required to carry out a full actuarial assessment of the funding position every three years and an interim assessment of the position must be included in the annual report of a scheme. Where a scheme does not meet the funding standard the trustees are required to put in place a funding proposal to enable the scheme to meet the standard within three years. The Pensions Board can extend this period to ten years in certain circumstances including where the funding position of a scheme has been adversely affected by market difficulties. Up to the end of March this year 1,343 of the 1,416 Defined Benefit pension schemes registered with the Pensions Board submitted funding certificates and 77% of these schemes satisfied the Funding Standard. In many cases the assessments, on which the funding certificates are based, pre-date the recent market difficulties and so it will be sometime yet before it becomes apparent what impact these will have on individual pension schemes. Pensions are long-term investments and changes in market performance over the short-term must be viewed with caution for that reason. Private pensions performed positively over a number of years before the recent change in fortunes. That said, there is no doubt that difficulties in the markets impact on pensions in a number of ways. Firstly, as employers bear the investment risk for the schemes, it puts pressure on defined benefit provision. The cost to employers of maintaining defined benefit schemes has increased significantly in recent years and any period of sustained market losses is a cause for concern as they will be required to make up any deficits which may arise in scheme funding. 430 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Secondly, as regards defined contribution schemes, losses can impact on the value of the fund and the level of pension it can provide. This has serious implications for members who carry the investment risk. Stock market losses may affect confidence in the system at a time when the Government is encouraging people to make early provision for their retirement. As the House is aware the Government published a Green Paper on Pensions in October 2007. The associated consultation period on the paper will draw to a close at the end of May. The Government is committed to developing a framework for future policy on all aspects of pensions with a view to putting in place a sustainable pension system which people can be confident will deliver an adequate income in retirement. This framework will be developed by end 2008.

Social Welfare Code. 87. Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the lone parent reforms proposed by her; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18713/08]

93. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when legislation relating to lone parent reforms can be expected; if procedures have been agreed for Depart- mental action to support the proposals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18714/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 87 and 93 together. The Government discussion paper, “Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents,” put forward proposals for the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities for lone parents; the extension of the National Employment Action Plan to focus on lone parents; focused provision of childcare; improved information services for lone parents and the introduction of a new social assistance payment for low income families with young children. Under the proposals, the lone parenthood category would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents (living alone or with a partner), with young children, on low income. This new payment is currently being developed in my Department, taking into account the various issues raised in the consultation process which continues to take place. Any proposed new payment scheme can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place on the ground by other relevant Departments and Agen- cies. This is why the Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion has been tasked with bringing forward a plan on the key issues of childcare, education, training and activation measures. The non-income recommendations contained in the discussion paper were examined in two areas: Coolock and Kilkenny. These studies focused on identifying and resolving any practical and administrative issues that may arise in advance of the scheme being introduced. These studies took place between November 2007 and February 2008. The studies allow for operational and logistical co-ordination between the relevant Departments and Agencies to be considered and facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme and accompanying supports. The outcome of the process is currently being considered in the Department. This will inform the further development of the proposals which I hope to bring to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion in the coming months.

431 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Social Welfare Benefits. 88. Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the rationale for not paying child benefit and early childcare supplement to foster parents from the commencement of their foster care arrangement where it is known in advance that the arrangement is to be long-term in nature; and the review that she will conduct of this policy. [18601/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Child benefit is a monthly payment, paid in respect of children up to the age of 16 years. It continues to be paid in respect of children up to and including 18 years where they are in full-time education, or where they have a physical or mental disability. Prior to April of this year child benefit continued to be paid to the birth parent where a child was placed in foster care, regardless of the duration of foster care or the level of support provided by the birth parent. This arrangement was based on a legislative provision which deemed that the child should be regarded as normally residing with the mother, even where the child had been placed with foster parents. New arrangements have now been put in place whereby child benefit transfers to a foster parent after a period of six months of foster care. The rationale behind this change is that the purpose of child benefit is to assist toward the ongoing cost of child rearing. However, when introducing the change, it was considered inappropriate to withdraw payment from a parent in respect of short periods of foster care, such as during a period of recuperation from illness in the case of a single parent without family or other supports. Furthermore, it is recognised that the immediate withdrawal of child benefit may have an adverse financial effect on the mother who may, regardless of the duration of the foster care, maintain some level of contact with the child. Following discussions with the Health Service Executive (HSE) and the Irish Foster Care Association, it has been established that the HSE initially consider the vast majority of foster care arrangements to be short-term placements. In view of this and in light of the fact that legislating for all possible scenarios would be impractical, it was decided that six months represents a reasonable ‘lead-in’ time before the transfer of child benefit. The foster parent is subsequently entitled to child benefit from the seventh month of foster care. The early childcare supplement, which is administered by the Department on behalf of the Office of the Minister for children and paid in respect of children under six years of age, also transfers to the foster parent. As it is paid quarterly in arrears, it is paid to the person who was entitled to CB for the majority of the proceeding quarter. I believe that these arrangements present the most equitable method of administering payment of child benefit in what can be very difficult circumstances for the families concerned.

Question No. 89 answered with Question No. 83.

Question No. 90 answered with Question No. 80.

91. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her intentions to issue new guidelines or take other courses of action to clarify the way deciding officers should treat an application for carers respite grant where the claim was made outside the statutory time limit; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18610/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Respite Care Grant is an annual payment made to all persons providing full-time care, regardless of means or PRSI contribution record, but subject to certain statutory conditions. These conditions relate primar- 432 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers ily to employment outside the home, the provision of full time care as set out in legislation, and the medically certified need for such care. The Grant is payable from the first Thursday in June of the year in respect of which the application is made and all the qualifying conditions must be satisfied on that date. The majority of Respite Care Grants are paid to people who are in receipt of certain primary social welfare payments, notably Carer’s Allowance, Carer’s Benefit or Constant Attendance Allowance. In these cases, the Grant is paid automatically without the recipients having to make a specific application for it. The extension of the scheme to all carers was introduced in Budget 2005. This provided that people who are providing full-time care and attention may qualify for the Respite Care Grant, regardless of primary payment, by making specific application for it. To this end, a new unit was set up in my Department to process applications from this newly eligible category of people. In 2005, applications for the Grant amounted to 6,813 and of these, some 5,930 were successful. The number of applications in 2006 rose to 13,916 and 10,051 of those were successful. In 2007, applications fell slightly to 13,564, with 10,959 being successful. Those receiving payment of the 2006 and the 2007 Grant included those who received the Grant the previous year and who confirmed that they continued to satisfy the qualifying conditions. A recent change was made to the legislation, which has the effect merely of clarifying existing arrangements. There is a requirement under primary legislation that a person must claim their entitlement within a specified period from the date their entitlement arises. In the case of the Respite Care Grant this period runs from roughly mid- April of the year for which the Grant is being claimed to the 31st of December of the following year. The legislation helps to set down more clearly the prescribed time within which a claim for the Grant for a particular year must be made. Claims received outside this time period can also be allowed in certain circumstances, at the discretion of a Deciding Officer where the applicant can show that there is a reasonable explanation for the failure to claim within the prescribed time. The recent legislative measure does not involve changes to procedures which have been in place since the inception of the newly extended scheme in Budget 2005. Deciding Officers who deal with applications for the Grant have been advised of this.

Social Welfare Appeals. 92. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her intention,to provide statutory independence to the Social Welfare Appeals Office. [18611/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Social Welfare Appeals Office, which was established in 1990, acts as an independent and separately managed office of my Department. The Office was set up in response to concerns about a perceived lack of independence and, also, in line with a commitment in the Programme for National Recovery. Prior to 1990, appeals were made to the Minister and the appeals process was administered by the Department. Since 1990, appeals are made directly to the Chief Appeals Officer and are administered by the Social Welfare Appeals Office. The statutory basis for the social welfare appeals system is contained in Part 10 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 and in Regulations made under the provisions of that Act. This legislation provides for the appointment of Appeals Officers and for various other procedures and powers necessary for the operation of the system. The legislation also outlines the powers and duties of the Chief Appeals Officer. The Appeals Officers are completely independent in the exercise of their functions, a fact which has been recognised and commented on by the Courts. 433 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

The Social Welfare Appeals Office aims to provide and deliver an independent, accessible and fair welfare appeals service in a prompt and courteous manner. The independence of the officers is, therefore, of paramount importance in carrying out their functions. The officers recognise the importance of fulfilling their role in an impartial and objective way in determining the cases submitted for adjudication. In this context, some 14,000 appeals were finalised in 2007, of which over 47% were decided in favour of the appellant. The present system has worked effectively and has provided a high standard of service since the establishment of the Social Welfare Appeals Office in 1990. The independence and integrity of the Appeals Officers in discharging their function has never been in doubt and, while there are currently no plans to provide statutory independence to the Social Welfare Appeals Office, I will be keeping all aspects relating to the functioning of the Office under review.

Question No. 93 answered with Question No. 87.

Pension Provisions. 94. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the rationale for applying the formula used to assess entitlement to a pre-1953 State pension where credits from a country with which Ireland has a bilateral agreement are used to satisfy the minimum number of contributions required; if her attention has been drawn to the anomalous position whereby once this minimum is reached, every extra non-Irish contribution results in a smaller payment for the applicant; the rationale for not basing the formula on the number of Irish credits as a proportion of total credits up to 260 credits; if her attention has been further drawn to the way in which the formula differs from the full State pension; if the effect of this formula is in keeping with our bilateral agreements; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18602/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Where a person has social insurance contributions from another EEA country, or a country with which Ireland has a bilateral agreement, these can be used to qualify a person for a pension. The manner in which contributions from EEA countries are to be used is laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and the same general principles are applied in the reciprocal agreements Ireland has with a number of other countries. These Regulations provide that where the conditions required by the legislation of a country for entitlement to old age benefits are satisfied only after counting the contributions made in another country, the first country shall calculate the amount of pension the person would be entitled to if s/he had completed his/her full career of periods of insurance under the legislation of that country. Then the proportional pension is calculated by multiplying the theoretical amount of pension by the ratio of periods of insurance in that State to the person’s full career. The pre-53 pension is a special measure designed to provide a pension to people who would not otherwise qualify for any payment. A number of such pensions are being paid in accordance with the arrangements outlined above and I am satisfied that such payments are calculated in accordance with the relevant EU regulations and the reciprocal agreements entered into by Ireland with other States.

Social Welfare Benefits. 95. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on whether the top rate of maternity benefit, currently \280, is an amount that new mothers, during perhaps the most expensive times of their lives, can be expected to survive on. [18569/08] 434 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

104. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on increasing the maximum rate of maternity benefit to an amount that would provide an acceptable living standard for new mothers. [18568/08]

105. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if there are plans to oblige employers to make contributions to their employees’ maternity leave payments, in order to increase the payments. [18570/08]

131. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has plans to introduce paid paternity leave. [18566/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 95, 104, 105 and 131 together. The Maternity Benefit scheme has been significantly improved, notably in the last few years, in terms of both the duration of the payment and the level at which it is paid. Budget 2006 provided for Maternity Benefit payments to be extended from 18 to 22 weeks. Following further extension of 4 weeks in Budget 2007 the period of Maternity Benefit payments rose to the current level of 26 weeks. Under Maternity legislation women may also choose to take a further 16 weeks leave without payment of benefit. In 2000, the rate of maternity benefit payable was the equivalent of \219.41 per week over 14 weeks — or \3,071 for the duration. Maternity Benefit is now paid at a weekly rate of \280 over 26 weeks — or \7,280 for the duration. This represents an increase considerably ahead of the rise in average industrial earnings. Some employment contracts may allow for additional periods of leave to be taken or for an additional top-up payment to be made above the normal entitlement to Maternity Benefit. These arrangements are discretionary private contractual arrangements agreed between employers and workers and, as such, are outside the realm of social welfare legislation. Provision of a social insurance funded payment for paternity leave would be contingent on an underlying entitlement to statutory paternal leave which is the responsibility of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I am satisfied that the rates and duration of maternity benefit in Ireland represent a reasonable response to the income needs of women on maternity leave.

96. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the recent report by Focus Ireland, Rental Systems in Ireland: The case for change; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18698/08]

100. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on Focus Ireland’s recent proposals that the housing income system of supplementary welfare allowance needs to be radically reformed and redesigned into an integrated housing benefit system; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18705/08]

101. Deputy Shane McEntee asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the recent submission by Focus Ireland in relation to the review of the adequacy and effectiveness of rent supplement under the supplementary welfare allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18704/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 96, 100 and 101 together. 435 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

The rent supplement scheme is administered on my behalf by the community welfare service of the Health Service Executive. The purpose of the scheme is to provide short-term income support to eligible tenants living in private rented accommodation whose means are insufficient to meet their accommodation costs and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source. In response to an invitation from my Department, Focus Ireland recently made a submission in relation to a review of rent limits currently being undertaken by the Department. Rent supplement is subject to a limit on the amount of rent that an applicant may incur. Rent limits are set at levels that enable the different eligible household types to secure and retain basic suitable rented accommodation. The objective is to ensure that rent supplement is not paid in respect of overly expensive accommodation having regard to the size of the household. The current rent limits were set in January 2007 and applicable to 30 June 2008. The limits were set following a review which resulted in rent limits being adjusted upwards for a number of household types at annual cost of \13 million. A consultative process is being used in the current review of rent limits, to ensure that the views of all relevant parties, including non- governmental agencies, are taken into account. The views put forward by Focus Ireland in this context are being considered and will form part of the review. Any adjustments to rent limits, resulting from this review, will be effective from 1 July 2008. On the issue of the adequacy and effectiveness of the rent supplement scheme in general, the scheme works well in providing income maintenance support where required in particular circumstances by tenants in the private rented sector. However, the rent supplement scheme has, over the years, developed beyond the original objective of providing short-term assistance with accommodation costs. A significant number of people have now come to rely on rent supplement for extended periods, including people on local authority housing lists. Of the 62,000 people in receipt of rent supplement, almost 32,000 rent claims are of over 18 month’s duration. The rent supplement scheme was not designed to meet long-term housing needs. One of the measures introduced to address the issue of long-term rent supplementation is the Rental Accommodation Scheme (RAS) which gives local authorities specific responsibility for meeting the long-term housing needs of people receiving rent supplement for eighteen months or more. Almost 13,000 people have been transferred from the rent supplement scheme to RAS since 2005. The objective is that local authorities will complete the transfer of all 32,000 rent supplement recipients with long-term housing needs to their care in time. I am anxious that all avenues are explored as regards ways of providing support for those on long-term rent supplementation. This is being considered in the context of overall housing policy, which comes within the remit of my colleague the Minister for the Environment Heri- tage and Local Government. That Department already provides a range of housing supports through local government initiatives, including traditional social housing and RAS, both of which provide tenants with the benefit of Differential Rent. They also include shared ownership and affordable housing schemes. Any further initiatives in relation to mortgage support will be framed by that Department in the context of its “Delivering Homes — Sustaining Communities” housing policy statement and “Increasing Affordable Housing Supply” published in 2007. I consider that it would be preferable to deploy resources directly in the housing support system rather than through the social welfare system. In the meantime the Department will continue working closely with 436 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers the Department of the Environment Heritage and Local Government in ensuring the success of RAS. Overall, I consider that the current range of housing supports, together with the enhance- ments that may emerge from the current public consultation in relation to affordable housing, provide the potential to meet long-term housing needs in an appropriate and sustainable manner.

97. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the supports in place to farm operators suffering from a disability in view of the fact that the average age of farm operators experiencing a disability is only 52 years old; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13066/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): My Department currently operates a range of schemes for people with an illness or disability including the insurance based illness benefit scheme, the occupational injury benefit scheme for those who are unable to work because of an accident or illness suffered at work and the means-tested disability allowance scheme. Farm operators normally pay Class A social insurance contributions and therefore, subject to satisfying the contribution and medical requirements, would be entitled to the full range of illness and disability payments. Should they suffer from a specified illness related to their employment or an accident while at work they can apply for injury benefit which would be paid for a period of 26 weeks. A person who acquires an illness or disability outside the work environment, or who is still unable to work after 26 weeks of receiving injury benefit, may qualify for illness benefit. They must meet certain medical and contribution requirements in order to receive this payment which can be paid for a period of 52 weeks or, if more than 260 contributions have been paid, may continue indefinitely. A person who does not satisfy the contribution conditions for illness benefit, and whose means are below a prescribed level, may qualify for disability allowance instead.

National Carers’ Strategy. 98. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the progress to date on the national carers strategy; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18695/08]

114. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the consultation that has taken place to date on the national carers strategy; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18697/08]

129. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when the national carers strategy will be published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18696/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 98, 114 and 129 together. The development of a National Carers’ Strategy is a key Government commitment in both the national partnership agreement “Towards 2016” and the Programme for Government. A working group, chaired by the Department of An Taoiseach, has begun work on developing the strategy. My Department provides the secretariat to the working group which also includes representatives of the Departments of Finance, Health and Children and 437 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] Enterprise, Trade and Employment as well as FA´ S and the Health Service Executive. To date, the working group has met on three occasions, in February March and April. Developing the strategy involves consultation with other government departments and bodies not represented on the working group. The Department of Social and Family Affairs has met with a wide range of organisations including the Equality Authority, Combat Poverty Agency, Citizen’s Information Board, the National Council on Ageing and Older People, the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the National Disability Authority. A request for submissions from the public was published in regional newspapers in early March. The closing date for submissions was Friday 18 April 2008. There was a good response from individuals and organisations and the submissions received are currently being examined. “Towards 2016” commits the DSFA to hosting an annual consultation meeting of carer representative groups and relevant government departments and agencies. Such a meeting was held on 23 January 2008. Representatives of 12 groups and 9 departments and agencies attended. The theme was the National Carers’ Strategy and groups were given an opportunity to comment on the draft terms of reference and to raise other issues considered relevant in the context of the strategy. It is intended that a further meeting with carer groups will be held in early summer. The commitment to the development of a National Carers’ Strategy also includes a commitment to appropriate consultation with the social partners. An update in relation to the strategy was provided to the social partners plenary session in February. The first of two consultation meetings with the social partners was the commitment to the development of a National Carers’ Strategy also includes a commitment to appropriate consultation with the social partners. An update in relation to the strategy was provided to the social partners plenary session in February. The first of two consultation meetings with the social partners was held on 8 May 2008. Key issues raised were recognition for carers and their work, access to suitable health services, income support, training, gender issues and balancing employment and care. It is intended to publish the strategy later this year.

Social Welfare Benefits. 99. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the actions she has taken on foot of the commitments in the programme for Government to examine urgently the introduction of free travel for returning Irish citizens of pension age who live abroad. [18614/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The free travel scheme is available to all people living in the State aged 66 years or over and to people receiving certain disability or care payments. Following extension of the free travel scheme on an “all Island” basis proposals were put forward to extend the scheme to Irish born people living abroad and those receiving pensions from my Department. Officials of the Department have been examining the proposal and, in this regard, have engaged in discussions with EU Commission officials. However, at this stage, it has not been possible to progress the matter as, under EU legislation discrimination on grounds of nationality is prohibited. More recently, the European Commission has indicated that to extend the scheme to people in receipt of an Irish pension could also be considered discriminatory. 438 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Questions Nos. 100 and 101 answered with Question No. 96.

Social Welfare Appeals. 102. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when she proposes to introduce new guidelines for the habitual residence rule in view of the inconsistencies identified in decision making by the social welfare appeals office. [18606/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The requirement to be habitually resident in Ireland was introduced as a qualifying condition for certain social assistance schemes and child benefit with effect from 1 May 2004. It was introduced in the context of the Government’s decision to open the Irish labour market to workers from the 10 new EU Member States, without the transitional limitations which were imposed at that time by most of the other Member States. The effect of the condition is that a person whose habitual residence is elsewhere would not normally be entitled to social welfare assistance or child benefit payments on arrival in Ireland. Under Social Welfare legislation, decisions in relation to all aspects of claims are made by statutorily appointed Deciding Officers. Each case received for a determination on the Habitual Residence Condition is dealt with in its own right and a decision is based on application of the legislation and guidelines to the particular individual circumstances of each case. Decisions in relation to Supplementary Welfare Allowance are made by Community Welfare Officers in the Health Service Executive (HSE). Any applicant who disagrees with the decision on a case has the right to request a review of that decision and/or appeal to the independent Social Welfare Appeals Office. While decisions to the effect that applicants satisfy the habitual residence condition (HRC) can be made in the vast majority (over 90%) of cases at claim acceptance stage on the basis of answers given on the primary claim forms, complex cases are examined in more detail. Claims involving complex HRC issues are assessed and decided in all scheme areas within my Depart- ment by a small number of deciding officers who are experienced and fully familiar with the issues involved for each scheme in regard to HRC. Arising from a review of the operation of the habitual residence condition which was carried out in 2006 revised and expanded guidelines for claims decisions staff on the application of HRC have been prepared in consultation with management in the various scheme areas. The guidelines will be issued in the immediate future and will be made available to all relevant staff and published on the Department’s website www.welfare.ie. Prior to the publication of the guidelines, and as an additional support, training and/or briefings will be provided as appropriate to decisions staff within my Department and within the Health Service Execu- tive. The revised guidelines place particular emphasis on the need for consistency. Deciding Officers will be advised to have regard to any previous HRC determinations in respect of the same applicant and will also establish whether the same factors continue to apply, and will take account of the latest relevant evidence and information. I am satisfied that this arrangement contributes greatly to accuracy and consistency in the decision-making process.

Services for People with Disabilities. 103. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the community and voluntary sector advocacy programme funded through the Citizens Information Board; her plans to further extend the programme’s coverage and guarantee funding on a long term basis; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18692/08] 439 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): In 2004 the Citizens Infor- mation Board in preparation for forthcoming legislation commissioned research from Good- body Economic Consultants on, Developing an Advocacy Service for People with Disabilities. The report which was launched in July 2004 proposed a three-stranded approach:

1. The establishment of a Personal Advocacy Service to be provided directly by the Citizens Information Board in line with the forthcoming legislation.

2. A programme of support for community and voluntary sector advocacy.

3. A Community Visitors Programme for people in long–stay residential centres.

In order to expand advocacy provision for people with disabilities the Citizens Information Board began a process in 2004 of engaging the community and voluntary sector in the provision of advocacy services to people with disabilities and also produced advocacy guidelines to inform and guide organisations in the development of advocacy services. The Community and Voluntary Sector Advocacy programme to-date has developed and funded 47 advocacy projects. The overall focus of the programme is on representative advocacy for people with a disability. The programme includes geographically based projects that cross disability type as well as those focused on a particular disability type. Each of the projects poses different challenges, some requiring more intensive work with smaller caseloads while others have larger caseloads with shorter periods of client contact. External evaluations are being undertaken on a sample of projects, and it is planned to undertake a full evaluation of the entire programme in 2010. It is not anticipated to grow the programme any further at this time. However, a small number of additional projects may be considered if any significant gaps are identified. The outcome of the evaluation will inform the future direction of the programme.

Questions Nos. 104 and 105 answered with Question No. 95.

Personal Advocacy Service. 106. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reasons for the ongoing delay with introducing a personal advocacy service; the month in 2008 when she expects it to be launched and fully operational; if a recruitment embargo applies to any of the proposed new posts of the new service; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18612/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The introduction of a personal advocacy service as provided for in the Citizens Information Act, 2007, is a priority for my Department. An organisational structure has been developed by the Citizens Information Board to meet the needs of the Personal Advocacy Service (PAS). Discussions between my Department, the Department of Finance and the Citizens Information Board are ongoing in relation to the additional staffing resources required for the provision of the service. The appointment to the new post of Director of PAS will be made shortly and the service will be launched when the Director has taken up the position, recruited the staff and is satisfied that the structures, resources and facilities are in place to allow the service to commence operation. In the meantime the Citizens Information Board is continuing preparatory work in relation to the establishment of the new service and has identified accommodation to facilitate its immediate needs. 440 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Social Welfare Code. 107. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the developments in the area of child care since she proposed the upcoming lone parent’s Bill, which will force single parents off welfare and into the workplace, leaving them in urgent need of affordable child care. [18571/08]

108. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when she will abolish the cohabitation rule in respect of the one-parent family payment. [18624/08]

110. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her Department engaged in a process of consultation before proposing the upcoming lone parents Bill; and if so, the persons with whom it consulted. [18572/08]

111. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way she will proceed in respect of the proposals for supporting lone parents document; and the precise timescale proposed. [18616/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 107, 108, 110 and 111 together. The Government discussion paper, “Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents,” put forward proposals for the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities for lone parents; the extension of the National Employment Action Plan to focus on lone parents; focused provision of childcare; improved information services for lone parents and the introduction of a new social assistance payment for low income families with young children. Under the proposals, the lone parenthood category of payment would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents (living alone or with a partner), with young children, on low income. Extensive consultation has been carried out at all stages in the development of the proposal. Submissions were invited from a range of organisations when the working group was first established within the Department of Social and Family Affairs to analyse the income support arrangements for lone parents and parents on low income. Thirty-nine organisations were contacted, including organisations participating in social partnership, lone parent organisations and other relevant organisations. Submissions were received from thirteen of these. A consultative forum also took place with the then Minister for Social and Family Affairs following the publication of the Government Discussion Paper. Attendees included representatives from a range of lone parent organisations, other NGOs, relevant agencies and other government departments, as well as opposition spokespersons and members of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Social and Family Affairs. In May 2006 the then Minister participated in a debate on the discussion paper in the Seanad and he presented the proposals to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Social and Family Affairs. The consultation process has continued as the proposals are being developed in the Department with a number of meetings having taken place between officials and lone parent groups. Presentations on the proposals have been made at various fora around the country. The discussion at these meetings and events has assisted in the development of the proposals. Any proposed new payment scheme can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place on the ground by other relevant Departments and Agen- cies. This is why the Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion has been tasked with bringing forward a plan on the key issues of childcare, education, training and activation measures. 441 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

The non-income recommendations contained in the discussion paper were examined in two areas: Coolock and Kilkenny. These studies, which took place between November 2007 and February 2008, focused on identifying and resolving any practical and administrative issues that may arise in advance of the scheme being introduced. These studies allow for operational and logistical co-ordination between the relevant Departments and Agencies to be considered and facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme and accompanying supports. The outcome of the process is currently being considered in the Department. This will inform the further development of the proposals which I hope to bring to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion in the coming months.

Social Welfare Appeals. 109. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the extra language or translation resources she will provide to the Social Welfare Appeals Office to overcome interpretation difficulties during oral appeals and in relation to the translation of foreign documentation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18609/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The provision of adequate interpretation and document translation services is an important element in delivering a quality service to my Department’s customers, particularly in the context of an increasing number of foreign nationals availing of social welfare services. In relation to social welfare appeals, I am advised by the Social Welfare Appeals Office that it arranges for the attendance of interpreters to assist appellants who do not enjoy a sufficient command of English to enable them to adequately put their case at the oral hearing. Similarly, arrangements are made for the translation of foreign documents, especially medical reports, when required for the purpose of an appeal. I am advised that the current level of resources available for those purposes is adequate and that the position is kept under review so as to meet demand as required.

Questions Nos. 110 and 111 answered with Question No. 107.

Tax Collection. 112. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way she proposes to comply with the provisions of the Finance Act, 2007 in relation to the collection and transfer of landlord PPS numbers who are in receipt of rent supplement to the Revenue Commissioners. [18603/08]

120. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if in view of the failure of her Department to withhold approximately \200,000 per year in tax from non-resident landlords to whom her Department pays rent supplements directly, she will conduct a cost-benefit analysis of introducing a paper-based system to collect this tax; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18620/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 112 and 120 together. Rent Supplement is administered on my behalf by the community welfare division of the Health Service Executive. The purpose of the rent supplement scheme is to provide short-term income support to eligible tenants living in private rented accommodation, whose means are insufficient to meet their accommodation costs and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source. Rent Supplement is the property of the tenant in all cases. 442 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

The Department is committed to effective co-operation with the Revenue Commissioners and in this regard, details of rent supplemented tenancies have for many years been supplied to the Revenue Commissioners, in a format agreed with them. Details are also supplied in respect of rent supplement paid directly to non-resident landlords. The Revenue Commis- sioners have indicated that they have had significant success in matching landlords of rent supplemented tenancies with their database of clients. The Finance Act 2007 obliges the department to collect and supply the Revenue Commis- sioners with landlord PPS or other tax reference number. Computer systems and new administrative arrangements are being developed to collect and record landlord PPS/ tax reference numbers to transfer this data to Revenue in an electronic format by the end of the year. The approach being taken is not merely to provide the reference numbers but to associate details of rent supplement payments with those data. Although the department does not have a facility to withhold tax from rent supplement paid directly to non-resident landlords, full details of such landlords are provided to the Revenue Commissioners for the purpose of allowing enquiries to be made as to tax compliance. The Minister for Finance has asked his officials and the Revenue Commissioners to review the requirement to deduct withholding tax from rent payments made to non-resident landlords. My Department is awaiting the outcome of this review and does not propose to change the current arrangements in the meantime.

Social Welfare Code. 113. Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will review the qualifying criteria for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance in order that low income families who derive earnings from self-employment may qualify. [18600/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Back to School clothing and Footwear Allowance (BSCFA) scheme provides a one-off payment to eligible families to assist with the extra costs when their children start school each autumn. The allowance is not intended to meet the full cost of school clothing and footwear but only to provide assistance towards these costs. A person may qualify for payment of an allowance if they are in receipt of a social welfare or Health Service Executive (HSE) payment, are participating in an approved employment scheme or attending a recognised education or training course and have household income below standard levels. Self-employed people may receive back to school clothing and footwear allowance provided they are receiving a qualifying payment, such as Family Income Supplement or Jobseekers Allowance. If a person is self-employed, they or their spouse may qualify in certain circumstances for jobseekers allowance or family income supplement subject to meeting the other qualifying criteria of these schemes. If a self-employed person is not in receipt of a qualifying payment such as jobseeker’s allowance, then they will not qualify for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance. I consider the back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme to be an important support for parents at a time of particular financial strain. The improvements to the scheme in recent years have provided a major boost to meeting the financial costs associated with return to school for those who most need assistance. Any changes to the structure of the scheme, rates of payment, income limits or amendments to the qualifying criteria would have cost implications and would have to be considered in a budgetary context and in the light of resources available to me for improvements in social welfare payments generally. 443 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Question No. 114 answered with Question No. 98.

Community Welfare Service. 115. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the discussions that have taken place between herself and the Health Service Executive in relation to the moving of community welfare officers to her Department; the number of meetings that have taken place; the persons who attended these meetings; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18715/08]

117. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the work undertaken between herself and the Health Service Executive to define the role of the community welfare officer if they move to her Department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18716/08]

133. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the rationale for the proposed transfer of the community welfare service to her Department; the research which exists to support such a move; the expected impact of such transfer on the users of the service; and if she will he make a statement on the Government’s objectives in the context of this proposal. [18617/08]

138. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the action that will be taken in relation to the role of the community welfare officer under her Depart- ment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18717/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 115, 117, 133 and 138 together. The decision to transfer certain functions from the Health Service Executive (HSE) to my Department follows on from recommendations made by the Commission on Financial Manage- ment and Control Systems in the Health Service. In its report, the Commission noted that over the years, the health system had been assigned responsibility for a number of activities that are non-core in the context of a health service. In view of the range of challenges facing the health sector, it recommended that the Government consider assigning such non-core activities to other bodies. The Government considered the matter and in February 2006 decided to transfer certain functions from the HSE. The functions to be transferred included the General Register Office and various payments, including supplementary welfare allowances and payments made to or in respect of persons with a disability, namely domiciliary care allowance, mobility allowance, infectious diseases maintenance allowance and blind welfare allowance. The mechanics of transferring dental, optical and other treatment benefits from my Department to the health sector was also to be examined. The General Register Office transferred to my Department in January this year and plans to transfer dental, optical and treatment benefit to the health sector are being developed. In addition plans are well advanced for the transfer of the domiciliary care allowance scheme and the other disability related income maintenance schemes to my Department. Provision has been made in the Social Welfare and Pensions Act, 2008 for the transfer of the administration of SWA to my Department to take place. This provision is subject to Commencement Order.

444 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Officials from my Department, the Department of Health and Children and the HSE have met the Superintendent Community Welfare Officers as a group on three occasions to discuss the transfer. In addition officials are engaged in discussions with the unions representing the Community Welfare Service staff in relation to the transfer proposals. These discussions are being facilitated by an independent chairperson. Twenty one meetings haven taken place since last October and further meetings are expected to be held. Progress has been made in these discussions in some areas but a number of issues remain to be resolved. The intention is to reach a collective agreement with the Unions which will deal with the concerns of all the staff involved. In this regard, discussions are also taking place with the civil service unions, representing staff in my Department, in relation to the transfer proposals. During the course of the discussions the Unions have sought assurances about the future role of Community Welfare Officers and the discretionary element of the SWA scheme. Assur- ances have been given that when the service transfers to my Department the existing flexibilities will be retained. Community Welfare Officers working within my Department’s structure will continue to make discretionary payments under the SWA scheme. They will remain community based and will continue to provide key information advice, advocacy and referral links between agencies. The integration of the Community Welfare Service with my Department will allow for development of the role of Community Welfare Officers. There is already a significant level of liaison between them and locally based staff in my Department. I am satisfied that the transfer of the Community Welfare service to my Department is appropriate and timely. It will allow for the development of the role of the Community Welfare Officers and will lead to an integrated and improved service for those in need. The existing flexibilities within the scheme will be maintained and Community Welfare Officers will remain community based and will continue to provide information, advocacy and referral links between agencies.

Social Welfare Schemes. 116. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the Central Statistics Office’s consumer price index detailed sub-indices report of March, 2008 which indicates that rents have increased by 10.4% in 12 months; and when she will increase rent supplement limits to reflect this trend. [18619/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Rent supplement is administered on my behalf by the Health Service Executive as part of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. Rent supplement is subject to a limit on the amount of rent that an applicant may incur. Rent limits are set at levels that enable the different eligible household types to secure and retain basic suitable rented accommodation, having regard to the different rental market conditions that prevail in various parts of the State. The objective is to ensure that rent supplement is not paid in respect of overly expensive accommodation having regard to the size of the household. Setting maximum rent limits higher than are justified by the open market would have a distorting effect on the rental market, leading to a more general rise in rent levels. This in turn would worsen the affordability of rental accommodation unnecessarily, with particular negative impact for those tenants on lower incomes, including people in low wage employment. 445 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

Notwithstanding these limits, under existing arrangements the HSE may, in certain circumstances, exceed the rent limits. This discretionary power ensures that individuals with particular needs can be accommodated within the scheme and specifically protects against homelessness. The current rent limits were set in January 2007 following a review of the maximum levels of rent which a person may incur and still be eligible to receive rent supplement. The review informed the process of setting new limits applicable from January 2007 until 30 June 2008. Arising from the review, rent limits were adjusted upwards for a number of household types in 14 counties at an annual cost of \13 million. A review of current rent limits is now under way . A consultative process is being used to ensure that the views of all relevant parties are sought and taken into account in the process. This includes consultation with the HSE, the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Central Statistics Office, the Private Residential Tenancies Board and voluntary agencies working in this area. This process will help ensure that the new rent limits reflect realistic market conditions throughout the country. Any adjustments to rent limits, arising from this review, will be effective from 1 July 2008.

Question No. 117 answered with Question No. 115.

Social Welfare Code. 118. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the recent report on One Family’s New Futures Project Increasing Labour Market Outcomes for Lone Parents; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18711/08]

132. Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the recently launched One Family Strategy 2007 to 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18712/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 118 and 132 together. The Department has recently received the One Family Strategy 2007 to 2009, and also the final report of their New Futures Project and found them both very worthwhile and informa- tive. The Strategy document outlines the progress One Family aims to achieve by 2009 across the areas of client services, legal and policy change and attitudinal change. Overall, One Family aims to continue to work to change attitudes towards lone parents. This is something that I am very much in favour of. Society and attitudes in Ireland have changed radically in the last 25- 30 years, alongside dramatic changes that have taken place in family formation. There is, however, still room for improvement in acceptance of all forms of family diversity, with the well-being of children being the key focus. The New Futures project was developed by One Family as a continuation of their successful Moving On programme. New Futures aimed to support lone parents as they progressed from being dependent on welfare to supporting themselves independently. The project brought together the complementary expertise of front line service providers to develop a model of service provision to support lone parents who have been excluded from the labour market to progressing into sustainable employment. This initiative is in line with the Government’s view that it is only through education, training and improved employment prospects that the risk of poverty and social exclusion of lone parents can be radically reduced. 446 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

In this regard the new proposals for supporting lone parents that both the Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion and my Department are developing, are progressing. The testing phase of the non-income aspect of the proposals has ended and the outcome of the process is currently being considered. This will inform the further development of the proposals, which I hope to bring to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion in the coming months.

Social Welfare Fraud. 119. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the concerns of the Social Welfare Appeals Office of the actions of deciding officers in applying the fraud legislation to straightforward cases of overpayment; and the course of actions she will take to ensure that this practice ends. [18608/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Deciding Officers revise decisions when new evidence that affects entitlement comes to their attention. An overpayment arises where the revised decision is effective from a date in the past and may be due to mistakes having been made by the customer, a third party or by the department but may also be due to the customer making false or misleading statements or wilfully concealing material facts i.e. fraud. Prior to deciding that changes in entitlement are due to fraud, deciding officers give careful consideration to all the evidence available and offer the customer the opportunity to comment, and to submit any facts or information to correct any inaccuracy or incompleteness in the information. If the customer is dissatisfied with the deciding officer’s decision s/he may appeal the decision to the Chief Appeals Officer. Comprehensive guidelines are issued and training is provided to Deciding Officers to ensure that high standards are met and maintained in all aspects of decision-making. Focus is placed on the appropriate legislation that should be applied when making revised decisions. I am satisfied that in the vast majority of cases, correct decisions are made regarding entitlement and that Deciding Officers provide a high quality service. Regular meetings are held with the Social Welfare Appeals Office to discuss the quality of decision making and any other issues which need to be addressed. Individual cases, brought to attention by the appeals office, because they do not meet acceptable standards, are followed up so that corrective measures can be taken.

Question No. 120 answered with Question No. 112.

Pension Provisions. 121. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on offering social welfare contribution credits for old age pension purposes to carers who have spent a major proportion of their working lives providing care for family or others in such need even though they may not have had to give up insurable employment to provide this care; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18682/08]

174. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her proposals to award pension based social welfare credits to carers who do not have social welfare contributions from other employment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18851/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 121 and 174 together. 447 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

In order to qualify for the maximum rate of the state pension (contributory), a person must, amongst other qualifying conditions, achieve a yearly average of at least 48 contributions paid or credited on his/her social insurance record over their working life. Reduced pensions are paid to those with yearly averages as low as 10 contributions. Arrangements are also in place to cater for those with social insurance contributions at different rates, with contributions from other EU member States or countries with which Ireland has reciprocal social security agreements and with pre-1953 contributions. The range of different payments available has made it easier for people to qualify for a contributory pension. Measures are also in place to protect the social welfare pension entitlements of those who leave work to care for sick or elderly relatives. People who qualify for payments such as carer’s allowance or carers benefit may, subject to conditions, qualify for credited contributions. The homemaker’s scheme, which was introduced in and took effect from 1994, allows up to 20 years spent caring for children or incapacitated adults to be disregarded when a person’s social insurance record is being averaged for pension purposes. This scheme applies to people who take time out of the workforce for caring duties but who do not qualify for credits through the carer’s allowance or benefit schemes. Any person, including a carer, may pay voluntary contributions once they satisfy certain qualifying conditions. A person may choose to pay voluntary contributions, provided they are no longer covered by a PRSI scheme on a compulsory basis in Ireland, are no longer covered by a PRSI scheme on a compulsory or voluntary basis in any other E.U. country, are under age 66 and satisfy the qualifying conditions. Voluntary contributions provide cover for long- term benefits, such as pensions. To become a voluntary contributor, a person must have paid at least 260 PRSI contributions in either employment or self-employment and apply within 12 months of the end of the contribution year during which they last paid compulsory insurance or were last awarded a credited contribution. The person must agree to pay voluntary contributions from the start of the contribution week that follows the week in which they left compulsory insurance. From June 2006, the number of hours a person can engage in employment, self employment, education or training outside the home and still be eligible for carers allowance, carers benefit and the respite care grant was increased from 10 to 15 hours per week. Where a carer remains in employment he or she will continue to pay the appropriate social insurance contribution. Overall, I am satisfied that adequate arrangements are in place to protect the pension entitlements of people who leave employment to provide full-time care so that they can qualify for a contributory pension. There are, of course, people caring who cannot benefit from these measures. The position of these, and others who are at present not receiving support through the social welfare pension system, is considered in the Green Paper on Pensions. A consultation process on the Green Paper is underway and will remain open until the end of this month. The Government will respond to the process by publishing a framework for future policy on all aspects of pensions and I expect that this will be finalised before the end of the year. The position of those who are at present without a contributory pension entitlement will be considered in that context.

Social Welfare Benefits. 122. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the actions 448 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers she has taken to explore the possibility of including in the household benefits package, a national waste services waiver scheme. [18613/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The setting of waste management charges and the introduction of waivers in respect of waste charges is, as has been stated in this House on many occasions, a matter for each local authority. Local authorities operate under the auspices of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The introduction of a national social welfare scheme as part of the household benefits scheme to address the issue would not be feasible given the wide range of charging regimes and cost structures that exist in respect of waste management throughout the State. Charges vary across local authorities and within local authorities where there is more than one provider. In addition, some local authorities and private operators already operate waiver schemes but again the qualifying conditions for these schemes also vary. Any system put in place to assist people with waste collection charges would have to take account of the different local arrangements. My officials have discussed this issue with their counterparts in the Department of Envir- onment, Heritage and Local Government and I understand that Department does not have any plans at present to introduce a National waiver scheme. Similarly, I have no plans to introduce a waiver scheme through the social welfare system.

123. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the action she is taking to deal with the oversight in her Department’s guidelines in relation to the application of EU regulations to the entitlement of migrant workers to child benefit where their children resided outside Ireland, as highlighted in the 2007 report of the Social Welfare Appeals Office; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18605/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The reference in the Social Welfare Appeals Office Report 2007 relates to a number of cases where Child Benefit claims were submitted outside of the specified time frame for so doing. The small number of Child Benefit claims referred to were paid from the month after receipt of the claim as provided for by Social Welfare legislation. EU legislation provides that in certain circumstances such claims to family benefits can be backdated to an earlier date. The decision to allow payment only from the month after receipt of the claim was subsequently appealed by the customer to the Social Welfare Appeal office. The appropriateness of the application of this EU legislation to the Child Benefit claims in question is being examined by the Department at present. When this examination is completed the relevant Department guidelines will be updated if required.

124. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she is satisfied that the increases in welfare and pension payments in 2008 are sufficient to meet the growing cost of living for low income individuals and families and retired people; and her intentions to seek a supplementary estimate to support her Department’s clients with these rising costs. [18625/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Improvements in social welfare supports are normally introduced by way of the annual Budget. Budget 2008 provided for increases in welfare rates of payment which are ahead of the projected increases in prices for 2008. These included:

— An increase in the maximum personal rates of contributory pension of \14, or 6.7%, per week, and

— An increase of \12.00 per week, or 6.5%, in the lowest personal rate of payment. 449 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

In addition, a wide range of improvements for families with children were also announced. Following Budget 2008, total child income support for a welfare-dependent family with one young child will be \87.77 per week, an increase of 7% over 2007. Over the last five Budgets, the lowest social welfare rates have increased by 58% compared to cumulative price increases of 17% in the same period. In 2004, the lowest social welfare rate of payment equated to 24% of gross average industrial earnings. In 2008 this rate will equate to 30%. Overall social welfare spending in 2008 is projected to be just under \17 billion, an increase of \1.5 billion (or more than 10%) over 2007. The level of increases introduced this year clearly demonstrate the Government’s determination to fully protect the most vulnerable in our society and to making real progress towards achieving our commitments for pensioners, carers, people with disabilities and all others relying in whole or in part on a welfare payment. I look forward to making further progress in this regard in the years ahead, having regard to available resources.

Pension Provisions. 125. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the procedures in place to deal with personal queries submitted as part of the public consultation process for the Green Paper on Pensions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18718/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Green Paper on Pensions was published on the 17th October 2007, beginning a period of consultation on our pensions system which will continue until the end of May 2008. From time to time, the Department has received personal queries about people’s State Pen- sion entitlements through the channels set up to receive Green Paper submissions. Where this occurs, the Department refers the queries to the relevant pension section of the Department for attention.

Social Insurance. 126. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if there are plans to withdraw funds from the social insurance fund to pay for rising unemployment costs; and if so, the amount that will need to be withdrawn. [18573/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): There are no plans at present to withdraw funds from the Social Insurance Fund.

Homeless Persons. 127. Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the consultation she has had with the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Execu- tive in regard to homelessness; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18702/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Government is committed to addressing homelessness in a comprehensive and co-ordinated manner. Substantial progress is being made under the Government’s strategy on adult homelessness, in addressing the needs of people who are homeless and in assisting them to move to accommodation that is suitable to their needs. This has been done through the recognition that a solution to homelessness is not just about the provision of housing or shelter. There is also a need for a comprehensive approach involving health, care and welfare, education, training and support, as well 450 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers as accommodation, to enable homeless persons to re-integrate into society and to prevent others from becoming homeless. Under the social welfare system, homeless people have the same entitlements as any other person. They can be paid a basic allowance under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme if they do not fulfil the conditions for any other primary weekly payment from my Department. In addition, they can apply for payments such as rent supplement, diet supplement and exceptional needs payments. My Department determines overall policy in relation to the supplementary welfare scheme and communicates this to the HSE and the community welfare service who administer the scheme on behalf of the Department. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has overall responsibility for addressing homelessness and is currently developing a revised strategy in that regard. The strategy is being developed under the aegis of a Cross Departmental Team on Home- lessness which is chaired by that Department. My Department is represented on the Cross Departmental Team as is the Department of Health and Children and a number of other government departments and agencies.

International Agreements. 128. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of countries with which Ireland has bilateral social welfare agreements thereby enabling some citizens qualify for payment on foot of contributions in more than one jurisdiction; the jurisdictions with whom the agreements have been most beneficial in terms of expeditious and efficient assessment of applications; the countries with least impressive performance in this regard; if she will take action to ensure that all such applications are rapidly processed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18683/08]

176. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will examine the degree to which bilateral social welfare agreements are operating effectively with particular reference to the need to reduce delays of up to two to three years in some cases; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18853/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 128 and 176 together. Ireland has social security agreements with Austria, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the USA and Switzerland. These agreements came into effect between 1989 and 1999, except for that with the UK which covers the Isle of Man and Channel Islands and came into effect on 1st October 2007. Ireland also has a bilateral understanding with Quebec since 1 October 1994. In the cases of Austria and Switzerland, the agreements have limited application as the EU regulations normally apply in these cases. The main purpose of the agreements is to protect the social security pension rights of workers who have worked both in Ireland and the other country to which the agreement applies. The arrangements protect pension rights by allowing reckonable periods in each country to be taken into account in either country in determining the entitlement to certain benefits where there would be no entitlement if national legislation only applied. All of these agreements are currently in operation and are generally working satisfactorily. The time taken to process claims that fall to be examined under bilateral agreements can be longer than that for standard Irish entitlements, reflecting the added complexity that arises in determining entitlements under these agreements and the necessity to obtain the relevant foreign insurance details. Delays, in general, occur where persons have had a varied employment history over a long period and this can lead to some difficulties in completing their full 451 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] insurance record. Where particular delays occur in the exchange of information, every effort is made to minimise processing times, having regard to the overriding objective in dealing with these claims to ensure that people receive their full and correct entitlements. Liaison procedures to ensure the secure transfer of personal data have been established with each country and are kept under constant review. Regular contact is made with the appropriate agencies to ensure the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of transfer of the information required to decide on claims. Pension applications from customers who have worked in the UK represent the largest category of claims under bilateral agreements. My Department has established a very good working relationship with the UK Department of Work and Pensions, with regular direct communication on operational matters. Delays in processing applications do not ultimately result in any losses to pensioners in that those who qualify for payment have their claims backdated in accordance with the normal practice for backdating pension claims. I am satisfied that overall the procedures are working effectively and efficiently.

Question No. 129 answered with Question No. 98.

Social Welfare Code. 130. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when she proposes to expand the free telephone rental scheme by providing for free broadband for older people as promised in the Programme for Government. [18615/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The telephone allowance is a component of the household benefits package which also includes the electricity/gas allowance and free television license schemes. The package is generally available to people living in the State aged 66 years or over who are in receipt of a social welfare payment or who satisfy a means test. It is also available to people aged under 66 who are in receipt of certain social welfare disability payments or carer’s allowance. There are currently some 355,000 customers in receipt of the household benefits at an annual cost of \317 million. The primary objective of the telephone allowance scheme is to ensure access to help in an emergency and to provide an element of security. A secondary objective is to encourage social contact and to assist in the prevention of social isolation for those living alone. The Department has endeavoured to meet the demands of deregulation, notably in the telecoms market, where it supports multiple providers within the fixed line telephone business. A restructuring of the telephone allowance to a cash value was undertaken in 2003 and this has facilitated the inclusion of additional providers in the scheme since July 2004. The scheme was further extended to include mobile phones in April 2007 as a result of improvements announced in Budget 2007. Since then, customers have the choice of either opting for a direct credit to a telephone company for their land-line or for a cash payment in respect of their mobile phone. This means that it is no longer necessary for a person to have a fixed line phone in order to benefit from the telephone allowance. There are currently some 15,000 customers availing of the mobile phone option. In addition, the value of the telephone allowance was increased in line with general price increases in August 2007 from \296 per annum to \310.80 per annum. The Programme for Government includes a commitment to extend the scheme further to incorporate broadband services for older people. My Department is currently examining how 452 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers best to implement this commitment. It should be noted that where people access the internet using a land-line, the telephone allowance applies to their bill usage and will cover the cost of calls or internet usage up to the level of their allowance. Question No. 131 answered with Question No. 95. Question No. 132 answered with Question No. 118. Question No. 133 answered with Question No. 115.

Social Welfare Benefits. 134. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her plans to improve entitlements in relation to the backdating of welfare payments; and if she will bring it into line with the four-year rule that applies to claiming tax credits from the Revenue Commis- sioners. [18621/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The legislative provisions relating to late claims for social welfare benefits are set out in Section 241 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, and in Regulations made under that section. These provisions set out the times within which a person must claim, the disqualifications which apply where a late claim is made, and the circumstances in which the time limits may be extended. Since 1997 a number of improvements have been made to the provisions relating to late claims for social welfare payments. For example, prior to 1997 arrears of state pension contributory claims were limited to either three months or six months before the date of claim. Legis- lation introduced in 1997 extended that period to twelve months with proportional payments for certain periods prior to that. The legislation also provides for payment to be made on foot of late claims in the case of all schemes, other than supplementary welfare allowance, for a period of 6 months prior to the date of claim, provided that there was good cause for the delay in claiming. Changes introduced in 2000 provided for relaxation of the restrictions on backdating late claims under all schemes apart from jobseeker’s benefit, jobseeker’s allowance and supplementary welfare allowance and for further payment to be made, up to the level of full retrospection if the circumstances would warrant it, where:

— the delay was due to incorrect information having been given by my Department, or

— illness or a force majeure prevented a person from claiming earlier or,

— the person is dependent on the arrears of payment to relieve financial hardship.

It is generally accepted that there is an obligation on people to claim their social welfare entitlements in time. However, cases will inevitably arise where they fail to do so and the legislative provisions are designed to cater for such situations. I am satisfied that the current provisions strike a reasonable balance between, on the one hand the need to exercise super- vision and control of claims and, on the other hand, the need for appropriate recognition to be given to cases of genuine hardship or difficulty.

Social Insurance. 135. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way she proposes to deal with the anomalous position of the social insurance status of company directors as outlined in the 2007 report of the Social Welfare Appeals Office. [18607/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Increasing numbers of company directors are seeking formal insurability decisions as to their correct class of insurance, 453 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] some of which have come to the attention of the Social Welfare Appeals Office. As a result the Appeals Office has proposed a change in social welfare legislation aimed at simplifying the classification of directors. The situation arises due to the fact that, while some directors are regarded as self-employed for PRSI purposes, all are covered under the PAYE provisions of income tax legislation. In addition, directors can hold two positions in a company, one as an office holder and the other as a working director whose employment may come under the terms of a contract of service, insurable at Class A. The proposal is currently under consideration by officials in my Department.

Personal Advocacy Service. 136. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the action she will take to raise awareness and understanding of advocacy among people with disabilities and service providers, in particular the new personal advocacy service which is due to be operational in 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18693/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): A key function of the Per- sonal Advocacy Service will be to develop awareness and understanding of advocacy amongst people with disabilities and service providers. This will be done through a range of measures including engaging directly with disability representative groups, service providers and other voluntary and statutory organisations who deal with people with disabilities. The Personal Advocacy Service will also promote its services through professionals such as General Prac- titioners, Public Health nurses and residential care workers. In addition, family members and the general public will be targeted through general pro- motions and through the network of Citizen Information Services, which operate at over 250 locations nationwide. The Citizen Information Services also provide advocacy services, within the mainstream context, to members of the public who require additional support to access their rights and entitlements. A considerable amount of work has already been done to generate awareness at local level and within the disability sector by the 47 projects funded under the Citizens Information Board’s Community and Voluntary Sector Advocacy programme. The Personal Advocacy Service will be working in close collaboration with these projects to maximise the resources of both programmes and ensure people with disabilities have access to advocacy services at the most appropriate level to meet their needs. In addition, my Department has an established Disability Consultative Forum which comprises disability groups, service providers and other voluntary and statutory organisations. It meets regularly to discuss issues relevant to people with disabilities. The Forum is an important means of communications to our customers with disabilities on their rights and entitlements, to brief them on developments, listen to their concerns and raise awareness on matters relevant to them, such as the establishment of the Personal Advocacy Service.

Social Welfare Benefits. 137. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she is satisfied that the guidelines in place for recipients of invalidity pension are sufficient; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18719/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Guidelines detailing circumstances that may affect ongoing entitlement to invalidity pension and conditions to be observed for customers claiming or receiving the pension are forwarded to customers in advance of the 454 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers award of invalidity pension claims, and a signed declaration acknowledging observation of these guidelines must be returned to my Department prior to the award of payment. These Guide- lines are also issued with the notification of the award of payment. Similar guidelines are printed at the back of the Personal Payable Order Book as a reminder for customers whose pension is paid by this payment method. Customers who receive payment by electronic methods are contacted annually by post and this communication also includes the previously mentioned guidelines. More detailed information on invalidity pension is available from the Department’s information leaflet on invalidity pension, SW 44 and the Freedom Of Information Guidelines on invalidity pension both of which may be accessed via the Department’s internet site at www.welfare.ie or from the Department’s Local Office network or by telephoning the Department’s Information Services at LoCall 1890 66 22 44. The guidelines issued by my Department on invalidity pension are detailed and comprehensive and are kept under constant review in order to improve the information provided to our Customers. However, if the Deputy is aware of a specific information deficit with regard to invalidity pension I will be happy to pass on the details to the relevant area of the Department and have the matter rectified.

Question No. 138 answered with Question No. 115.

Departmental Audits. 139. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the audit by the Data Protection Commissioner of her Department’s procedures for processing personal data is finalised; the main conclusions reached; and the specific actions her Department will be taking on foot of these conclusions. [18622/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner undertook an audit of the Department in late January 2008. The Commissioner is preparing his report and, in this regard, his officials have been liaising with officials of the Department. When the final report is received, its findings and recommendations will be carefully examined by the Department with a view to taking whatever actions are necessary.

Disabled Drivers. 140. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Finance if the primary medical certificate scheme in respect of Section 92 of the Finance Act 1989 and the Disabled Drivers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994 will be expanded to allow an application on behalf of a child (details supplied) in County Meath to be awarded with a primary medical certificate; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18742/08]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Scheme provides relief from VAT and Vehicle Registration Tax (up to a certain limit), and exemption from motor tax, on the purchase of an adapted car for transport of a person with specific severe and permanent physical disabilities. The disability criteria for these concessions are set out in the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994. To get a Primary Medical Certificate, an applicant must be permanently and severely disabled within the terms of these Regulations.

455 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.]

As the Deputy will be aware there was an interdepartmental review of the Scheme. Some 12,500 people benefited under the scheme in 2007 at an overall estimated cost of \74 million. Any changes would have to be considered in the context of the annual Budget.

Financial Services Regulation. 141. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will ensure that a maximum interest can be charged by all official money lenders and to make unofficial lending a crime punishable by a prison sentence. [18896/08]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Deputy may wish to note that in early 2007, the Financial Regulator (FR) published its review of the licensed moneylending industry in Ireland. With respect to interest rates, it concludes that the introduction of an interest rate ceiling for moneylenders may not achieve the objectives of lowering the cost of credit for consumers. The Report contained a number of other conclusions, including the fact that:

• Overall, consumers that use licensed moneylenders as a source of finance are happy with the service provided despite the fact that it is a relatively expensive form of credit.

• Not all consumers have access to other sources of credit.

• The FR committed to reviewing the ’Interim Code of Practice for Licensed Money- lenders’, with a specific emphasis on increasing transparency, helping consumers make informed decisions and enhancing the consumer protection framework.

In late 2007, the FR engaged with a number of interested stakeholders with a view to increased transparency in relation to costs associated with loans from moneylenders. It sought views on how best to disclose an itemised statement of the Annual Percentage Rate (APR) on its Regis- ter and how best to highlight the total cost of credit associated with moneylenders. Responses are being considered in the context of work being carried out in relation to the draft Consumer Protection Code for Licensed Moneylenders and transparency in the moneylending sector. As far as the question of illegal moneylending is concerned and the penalties for engaging in this activity, Section 98.-(1) and -(2) of the Consumer Credit Act, 1995 provides that a person must not engage in the business of moneylending without licence and Section 12 provides that a person commits an offence (other than a summary offence) if the person contravenes either of those subsections. Moreover, Section 13.-(1) provides that a person who is so guilty shall be liable on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding \100,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or both.

Equal Opportunities Employment. 142. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance his views on abolishing the maximum retirement age of 65 for civil servants recruited before 1 April 2004 in line with the absence of such restrictions for civil servants recruited after that date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18889/08]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Public Service Superannuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004 and the Civil Service Regulation (Amendment) Act 2005 introduced a number of important changes in relation to the retirement age of civil servants. These changes mean that there is no longer a compulsory retirement age of 65 for “new entrants” who joined the civil service on or after 1 April 2004. The changes also raised the minimum pension age to 65 years for most “new entrants” to the civil service, with the excep- 456 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers tion of “new entrants” to the Irish Prison Service, where different arrangements apply for operational reasons. The removal of a compulsory retirement age means that, over the medium to longer term, as more and more new staff are recruited as “new entrants” for the purposes of the new legislation, an increasing number of civil servants will have the right to work beyond the age of 65, if they choose to do so. Clearly, in time, all civil servants will be working under these terms and conditions.The legislative changes introduced also provide a mechanism by which existing civil servants can work beyond the retirement age if they wish. While a person who joined the public service before the 1 April 2004 must retire at 65, they can be reappointed through open competition to the civil service as a “new entrant”, provided there is a break in their service of 26 weeks. Ireland’s demographic profile, with one of the Europe’s youngest populations, allowed the 2004 Act to confine these changes to new entrants. In light of our demographics, there is no immediate financial imperative to introduce such a significant change to the terms and conditions of pre-2004 civil servants. Furthermore, the increase in the minimum pension age and the removal of the compulsory retirement age for new entrants cannot be managed in isolation. Other civil service human resource processes must be adapted and developed to reflect the changes in the retirement age. The performance management system which has been introduced across the civil service will, in time, support the gradual transition to a situation where an increasing number of civil servants will be required to work until age 65 before drawing full pension and will have the right to continue to work beyond that age. The issue of the removal of the retirement age for staff appointed before April 2004 was the subject of a recent claim by the civil service unions at General Council of the Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme. The claim was rejected on the grounds that:

• the cost imperatives which gave rise to the decision to change the retirement age arrangements for new entrants would not arise in the short and medium term, and

• relevant human resource processes and practices would have to be adapted over time to address the issues that would arise from the new arrangements.

In light of these points, there are no immediate proposals to change the current situation whereby staff recruited before 1st April 2004 must retire at 65 and those recruited on or after that date have no mandatory retirement age.

Tax Code. 143. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Finance the sources of income in respect of which persons under the age of 18 years can obtain tax credit to relieve the tax liability which would otherwise accrue; and if restrictions apply to the claiming of this relief. [18973/08]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Given the diversity of sources of income available to individuals (for example, self-employment, PAYE employment, investment and divi- dend income and deposit interest) it is not possible to provide a comprehensive list of sources of income which may arise. However, all individuals, including those under the age of 18 years, who are chargeable to income tax are entitled to those tax credits which are appropriate to their personal circumstances. In general, individuals, including those under the age of 18 years, are entitled to set the personal tax credits to which they are entitled against all sources of income. Entitlement 457 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.] to a tax credit is governed by the legislation relating to each relief. There are no special restrictions applying to those under 18 years of age.

Nursing Homes Repayment Scheme. 144. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children the exact calculation methods being used to determine the offers made to people under the Health (Repayment Scheme) Act 2006; and if she is satisfied with the methods used in view of the number of people who have been offered higher payments following their appeals. [18733/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Health Service Executive (HSE) has responsibility for administering the health repayment scheme in conjunction with the appointed scheme administrator K.P.M.G. and McCann Fitzgerald. The HSE has informed my Department that there are extensive procedures employed by the scheme administrator in order to compile a calculation. Firstly the records of the institution are checked for in-patient charges. The scheme administrator begins by using the scanned data based on the dates of admission provided by the claimant. It is determined whether the patient paid by invoice or by the HSE acting as agent on social welfare payment or perhaps both. The calculations team compiles the calculation based on this information. The HSE has informed my Department that if there are periods for which there are no records, the scheme administrator has worked with the HSE to devise rules to calculate the repayment. These rules are applied for these periods and compared to other years to ensure consistency. The scheme administrator also needs to ensure that the patient had full eligibility while the charges were paid. The HSE has informed my Department that they have agreed the procedures used to compile calculations with the scheme administrator. The scheme administrator has been audited by the HSE internal audit, the Comptroller and Auditor General and reviews of the scheme have also been carried out by an external auditing firm who have all been satisfied with the procedures adopted by the scheme administrator.

145. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Health and Children when an application for a person (details supplied) for the nursing home subvention refund scheme will be processed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18739/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Health Service Executive has responsibility for administering the Repayment Scheme and the information sought by the Deputy relates to matters within the area of responsibility of the Executive. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued to the Deputy.

Pharmacy Education. 146. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of training placements available in 2007 to allow pharmacy students to complete the pre-registration year; the number of same available for 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18743/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland (PSI) has statutory responsibility for pharmacy education and training. In late Autumn every year, the PSI writes to the total number of qualified tutor pharmacists held on its database (currently in excess of 1,000) to identify those who are in a position to provide a training 458 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers placement for pharmacy graduates within their pharmacy for the following training year (i.e. the training year due to commence the following Autumn). In recent years there have been around 200 placements available annually, mostly in the community sector, but with upward of 30 in the hospital sector. The details of the these placements are circulated to the fourth year pharmacy students by the PSI at the end of November via the schools of pharmacy. The number of available training placements notified to the PSI in Autumn 2006 for the 2007-08 training year was 202. All 144 pharmacy graduates qualified to take up placements found training places in 2007-08. In response to the PSI’s call for tutors for 2008/09, a total of 209 positive replies were notified to the PSI and circulated to the fourth year pharmacy students in late November 2007. Notwith- standing the above, certain difficulties were being experienced by pharmacy graduates this year in securing pre-registration training placements in the community pharmacy sector, primarily due to the withdrawal of such places by a number of tutors\pharmacies. However, I understand that the position has improved in recent weeks and the PSI continues to monitor the situation. A very small number of the placements in the hospital sector are also at issue, which my Department has raised with the HSE.

General Medical Services Scheme. 147. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Health and Children when the Health Service Executive will make payments (details supplied). [18752/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the funding, management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Services for People with Disabilities. 148. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Health and Children if funding will be made available to ensure a person (details supplied) in County Kerry will receive the necessary support. [18783/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As part of the Multi-Annual Investment Programme 2006-2009 under the Disability Strategy, the Government provided the Health Service Executive with an additional \75m in both 2006 and 2007. This funding included monies to provide new and enhanced services for people with disabilities, to implement Part 2 of the Disability Act 2005, which came into effect on June 1st 2007 for the under 5’s and also for the continuation of the implementation of the transfer of persons with intellectual disability from psychiatric hospitals and other inappropriate placements. The Government is also honouring its promise in relation to the Multi-Annual Investment Programme for people with disabilities, with a further \50m investment which was announced in the 2008 Budget. The Deputy’s specific question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

459 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

149. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Health and Children if funding will be made available to an organisation (details supplied) in County Kerry in order that they can provide support for people in need of support. [18784/08]

Hospital Services. 150. Deputy Sea´n Fleming asked the Minister for Health and Children if an outpatient appointment for a person (details supplied) in County Laois for 16 September 2009 at the urology outpatients department at Tallaght Hospital will be brought forward due to the unacceptable time to wait for such an outpatients appointment due to the person’s current health situation. [18799/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

151. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will investigate a case (details supplied) where a patient, who is a VHI member, was asked by the hospital to pay for a procedure because the consultant had not submitted the relevant documentation or paperwork; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18802/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The contracts entered into between private hospitals and their patients are entirely matters for the parties involved as are the contracts between health insurance companies and their customers. These arrangements are outside the scope of my responsibilities as Minister for Health and Children. All insurers have arrangements in place to ensure that payments are only made when they are satisfied that services have been provided.

Health Service Expenditure. 152. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount of funding allocated in 2008 for the hospital in the home programme to each hospital involved in the scheme; the number of patients in the programme; the number of patients whose treatment in 460 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers the home is about to cease; and if hospital beds are available for these people in view of the fact that the programme is ceasing. [18809/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall Vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular issues raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have the matters investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Health Service Allowances. 153. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) in County Cork has had their domiciliary carer’s allowance withdrawn in respect of care provided for their daughter; if she will review the circumstances surrounding the case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18879/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this case investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Ambulance Service. 154. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of ambul- ances operating in the greater Dublin area; the number owned by the Health Service Executive; the number owned by Dublin fire brigade; the numbers in both categories in each of the years 2000 to date in 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18880/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall Vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular issue raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Medical Aids and Appliances. 155. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) in County Clare will receive aids and appliances; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18887/08]

Controlled Drug Sales. 156. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children if and when the sale of a drug (details supplied) will be restricted or banned in this country following the recent 461 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Catherine Byrne.] decision of the European Council of Ministers to introduce new control measures for this drug; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18890/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 and regulations made thereunder regulate and control the import, export, production, supply and possession of a range of named narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances listed in the Schedules to the Act. Substances are scheduled under the Act in accordance with Ireland’s obligations under international conventions and/or where there is evidence that the substances are causing significant harm to public health in Ireland. The list of scheduled substances is kept under review; in particular, my Department reviews any evidence that substances are being abused and are causing significant harm to public health. The drug in question, benzlpiperazine (BZP), is not currently a scheduled substance under the Misuse of Drugs Act. However, a risk assessment of new psychoactive substances carried out by the European Monitoring Centre on Drugs and Drug Addiction has found that the use of BZP can lead to medical problems even if the long term effects of the substance are still unknown. Against this background, the European Council decided in March 2008 to place BZP under control in accordance with the 1971 UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances. Member States must act as soon as possible, but no later than one year from the date of the decision, to introduce control measures and criminal sanctions. Work is under way in my Department with a view to introducing the necessary control measures here.

Nursing Homes Repayment Scheme. 157. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of applications made to the nursing home repayments scheme; the number of payments made; the number of awards that have been appealed; the current backlog in dealing with appeals; the number of appeals officers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18898/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Health Service Executive (HSE) has responsibility for administering the health repayment scheme in conjunction with the appointed scheme administrator KPMG and McCann Fitzgerald. The HSE has advised my Department that as of the 2 May 2008 approximately 39,000 applications have been received under the health repayment scheme and 9,796 payments have issued. As of 2 May, 11,108 claimants are deemed to be outside the scope of the repayment scheme and of these, 2,285 have appealed the decision of the scheme administrator. 13,578 offers of payment have issued under the scheme and of these, 650 have appealed the amount offered. A total of 2,935 appeals have been lodged, which represents approximately 12% of processed claims. As of 9 May the appeals officer has considered 1,293 appeals. Following the establishment of the appeals office a temporary appeals officer was seconded from the Chief State Solicitor’s Office. Subsequently, a recruitment process was undertaken by the Public Appointments Service and a panel of appeal officers has been established. A second appeals officer is due to begin work shortly.

Hospital Accommodation. 158. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children when long-stay beds will be provided for persons (details supplied) in County Mayo. [18899/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate 462 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Health Services. 159. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Health and Children when the new Health Service Executive public health clinic in Balbriggan will operate to its full capacity; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that some Balbriggan residents are forced to travel to Gardiner Street, Dublin to see the community welfare officer; her views on whether this is an acceptable situation for staff and welfare recipients alike; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18900/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The provision of the appropriate infrastructure to facilitate the delivery of primary care services is the responsibility of the Health Service Executive. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matters raised by the Deputy investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

160. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Health and Children when a reply will issue from the Health Service Executive to Parliamentary Question No. 68 of 3 April 2008. [18962/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Health Service Executive has informed me that a reply was issued to Deputy O´ Caola´in from the office of the National Directorate of Estates on 15th April 2008.

Hospital Staff. 161. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Health and Children when a reply will issue from the Health Service Executive to Parliamentary Question No. 149 of 26 February 2008. [18963/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): My Department has been informed by the Health Service Executive that a reply has issued to the Deputy.

Medical Cards. 162. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Health and Children when replies will issue from the Health Service Executive to Parliamentary Question Nos. 106 to 109 of 13 December 2007. [18964/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): In order to provide the Deputy with the estimates of cost requested, it was necessary for my Department to obtain detailed information from the Health Service Executive (HSE). Based on information received from the HSE, my Department estimates that:

• The cost of extending the medical card to all persons aged under eighteen who do not currently hold a medical card would be approximately \296 million per annum.

• The cost of extending the GP visit card to all persons aged under eighteen who do not currently hold a GP visit card would be approximately \155 million per annum. (This allows for the fact that some 306,000 persons aged under eighteen currently hold a medi- 463 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Harney.] cal card and that they would continue to do so in the event of the GP visit card being extended to the under eighteen cohort.)

• The annual cost per person of a medical card is approximately \1,300.

• The annual cost per person of a GP visit card is approximately \220.

I would emphasise to the Deputy that the figures outlined above relate solely to the costs involved in respect of medical cards and GP visit cards and does not take into account other factors, such as income foregone in public hospitals, the provision of aids and appliances to medical card holders and costs in other areas of the public service where the medical card is used as a means of determining entitlement to services.

Services for People with Disabilities. 163. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Health and Children the position in relation to a person (details supplied) in County Wicklow who is waiting for a multidisciplinary assessment with the Health Service Executive in Naas; if they will be seen as a matter of urgency; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18965/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As part of the Multi-Annual Investment Programme 2006-2009 under the Disability Strategy, the Government provided the Health Service Executive with an additional \75m in both 2006 and 2007. This funding included moneys to provide new and enhanced services for people with disabilities, to implement Part 2 of the Disability Act 2005, which came into effect on June 1st 2007 for the under 5’s and also for the continuation of the implementation of the transfer of persons with intellectual disability from psychiatric hospitals and other inappropriate placements. The Government is also honouring its promise in relation to the Multi-Annual Investment Programme for people with disabilities, with a further \50m investment which was announced in the 2008 Budget. The Deputy’s specific question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

164. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Health and Children the position in relation to services for autistic children in the west Wicklow area; the pre-school facilities available in the area; if ABA is available in the area; the services available; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18966/08]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The availability of ABA in the West Wicklow area is a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Education and Science. The remainder of the Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.

Rural Transport Services. 165. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Transport the progress made in regard to the 464 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers commitment given in the programme for Government to greatly enhance and extend the rural transport initiative nationwide. [18761/08]

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Rural Transport Programme (RTP) launched in February 2007, placed the pilot Rural Transport Initiative (2002-2006) on a permanent mainstreamed basis with significantly increased funding. Some Euro 9 million was provided for the RTP in 2007 which led to an increase in the frequency of a number of existing services, extended area coverage, and additional groups of passengers accessing rural transport. The scheme is being expanded further in 2008 as a result of an additional \2m being allocated to Pobal in 2008 and I understand that the RTP will be operational in all counties by the end of the year.

Road Signage. 166. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Transport if he plans to introduce increased road markings and visibility aids for county roads nationwide on safety grounds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18740/08]

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): Under section 95 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 the provision of traffic signs on the public roads is a matter for each road authority. I have given directions and guidance to road authorities in the Traffic Signs Manual on the provision and use of traffic signs. The present Manual is currently under review and updated provisions will be published later this year.

International Travel Requirements. 167. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his proposals to deal with passport requirements for entry to the Schengen area; the way he proposes to deal with dif- fering biometric requirements for passports for entry to both the United States and Great Britain-Northern Ireland not being part of the Schengen area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18907/08]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Michea´l Martin): The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is the international body responsible for the specification of standards for international travel documents. ICAO policy requires that all passports in circulation in April 2010 be machine readable. Ireland commenced issuing machine readable passports in 1993. The ICAO has also defined the technical specifications for the issue of passports which incorporate biometric data, known as e-passports, but has not yet set the date by which all passports in circulation must be e-passports. As regards the United States, Washington required that countries, participating in its visa waiver program, commence issuing e-passports by 26 October 2006. Ireland in fact began issuing e-passports on 16 October, 2006, in accordance with the ICAO standards and in advance of the US requirement date. This involved the incorporation of a biometric feature -a facial image — in the Irish passport. A passport is not required for entry to Great Britain from this State. The Irish passport, however, meets fully the requirements for entry to Great Britain from third countries. As regards the Schengen area, Council Regulation (EC) 2252 of 2004 requires Schengen countries to include a facial image and fingerprints in their passports. The requirement for the inclusion of a facial image came into effect on 28 August 2006, while the requirement for the inclusion of fingerprints is to come into effect on 28 June 2009. However, as the Regulation relates only to Schengen countries, Ireland is not subject to its application. There are currently no plans to include a second biometric identifier, such as fingerprints, into Irish passports. 465 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Regulatory Reform. 168. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the programme for Government to review the regulatory regimes to better assist small and medium size businesses to conduct their affairs. [18767/08]

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): There are number of commitments in the Programme for Government relating to regulatory reform. Insofar as my Department is concerned, the Government has agreed that I should lead the effort across Government to reduce the administrative burden (or ‘red tape’ factor) on business, including small and medium sized firms arising from regulations. In July 2007 year, I established the High-level Group on Business Regulation whose role is to seek concrete actions to reduce administrative burdens on business in five policy areas i.e. Taxation, Statistics, Environment, Health and Safety and Employment & Company Law. The Group comprises representatives of the business sector, trade union and relevant Government Departments and Agencies. In particular the Group will seek to respond to specific suggestions from the business sector. I am expecting a first report from the Group in July 2008. In March 2008, the Government agreed to set a target to reduce the administrative burden of regulations on business of 25% by 2012. Again my Department has been asked to lead on this project. My Department is currently devising the approach and methodology to be used across Government and for reporting on progress. Initially, all Departments will be required to list the Information Obligations which their regulations impose on business. From that listing, Departments will assess which requirements are the most burdensome and will then measure the actual cost to business of the most burdensome requirements. Finally Departments will be required to propose ways to reduce the burden in order to meet the Government target. Finally, as part of the Government decision last March, it was also agreed that in relation to proposals for future regulations, all Departments should (a) assess the proportionality of the burden imposed to the risk foreseen (b) measure the administrative cost on business (c) examine the impact on small business and (d) consider what education and advice requirements are necessary to improve compliance. This decision will be further addressed through the Regulat- ory Impact Analysis (RIA) process. An independent review of the operation of RIA, being conducted on behalf of the Department of the Taoiseach is expected to be completed shortly.

Job Losses. 169. Deputy John Deasy asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment the number of job losses in Waterford City and County in each of the years 2004 to 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18805/08]

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The numbers of actual redundancies notified to my Department for the years 2004-2007 for Water- ford City and County are as follows:

Actual Redundancies 2004-2007

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007

Actual 957 998 675 631

466 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

These figures show the number of employees on whose behalf claims were submitted for statutory redundancy lump sum payments. They do not reflect those who lost their jobs with less than two years service in an employment. I have no control over the number of redundancies that occur at any given time. Naturally I am concerned at any trend that indicates greater than normal volatility in the labour market. However, it must be remembered that redundancy — as recorded in these statistics — does not equate with unemployment.

Decentralisation Programme. 170. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the reason there is a significant delay in the decentralisation of the Health and Safety Authority to Thomastown, County Kilkenny; the number of staff who have been recruited to the HSA, as well as REACH, on the basis that they will be moving to Thomastown; when she will transfer public and civil service staff to Thomastown; if she is satisfied that the HSA has provided for sufficient lands to meet anticipated and ongoing decentralisation of the HSA in Thomastown; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18911/08]

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The organisation of the decentralisation of the Health and Safety Authority (HSA) to Thomastown, Co. Kilkenny is primarily an operational matter for the Authority itself. The Authority already has temporary offices in Kilkenny City with an advance party of staff partly drawn from the 48 staff recruited on the basis that they would be employed in Thomastown. This figure includes all new staff recruited for the REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals) strategy. The Deputy will be aware that, at present, there is no formal arrangement in place for the transfer of staff between the civil service and State Agencies. The procurement of premises to facilitate decentralisation is primarily an operational matter for the Office of Public Works (OPW). I am informed that the OPW has signed a contract in respect of a site in Thomastown and the sale should close shortly. The OPW has had to go through the development process that required a material contravention of the County Development Plan and this was only finalised earlier in the year. The current estimated timeline for availability for occupancy of the Thomastown site is 2009/2010. I have no reason to believe other than that the premises will be sufficient to meet the HSA’s requirements.

171. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the number of persons transferred from Dublin under the decentralisation programme; the number of trans- ferees who have responsibility for arts, sport and tourism, respectively; the number of persons retained in the Dublin offices with the relative responsibilities as stated; the target number that has been set for his Department under the decentralisation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18795/08]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Deputy Martin Cullen): To date, a total of 70 staff from the Department have relocated to temporary accommodation in Fossa, Killarney, under the Government programme of decentralisation. The objective is to complete the decentralisation process by the end of 2008 by which time the Department will be operating from new purpose built offices in Killarney. Of the 70 staff in Fossa, 24 members of staff have responsibility for Sport, including the sports capital grants scheme and sports policy, 19 for Arts, including the Access scheme and the National Cultural Institutions and 6 for Tourism development. In Dublin, apart from the Secretary General and the three Assistant Secretaries, each of whom has responsibility for a sectoral area, there are 5 officers with responsibility for Sport

467 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Martin Cullen.] including major sports projects. There are 8 officers with responsibility for various elements of the Arts, and 4 with responsibility for Tourism Marketing policy and impact assessment. The target number set for decentralisation to Killarney is 130.

Legislative Reform. 172. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will establish a working group to reform the law to ensure that transgendered people are given recognition by the State; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18753/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): This issue was the subject of a recent High Court judgement concerning the rights of a person, who has undergone gender reassignment surgery, to recognition of her acquired gender. On foot of the High Court judgement, delivered on 19 October 2007, the judge made a declaration, pursuant to Section 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, that Sections 25, 63 and 64 of the Civil Registration Act 2004 are incompatible with the obligations of the State under the European Convention on Human Rights. The reason for the judgement of these Sections was the failure to respect the private life of the Applicant, as required by Article 8 of the Convention, in that there are no provisions which would enable the acquired gender identity of the Applicant to be legally recognised in this jurisdiction. This is the first time that the High Court has made a declaration of incompatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of a provision of Irish law. As such, the High Court judgement is very significant and raises complex and far-reaching issues, not merely for this case but for future cases under the European Convention on Human Rights Act. The judgment has implications for a wide range of legislative and policy areas including taxation, social welfare, pensions, family law, criminal law, equality, employment, sport, financial services, health, education and so on. In that context, it is essential to obtain the confirmation of the Supreme Court that the judgement was warranted and to seek clarity on all its implications. As the judgment is the subject of an appeal to the Supreme Court, it is not considered appropriate for me to comment further at this time.

Social Welfare Benefits. 173. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will expand the carer’s programme to facilitate payments to a wider group of carers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18850/08]

175. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if it is her intention to ease the qualification requirements for respite care grants in line with the original announcement at the introduction of the scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18852/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 173 and 175 together. Supporting and recognising carers in our society is, and has been, a priority of the Govern- ment since 1997. Over that period, weekly payment rates to carers have greatly increased, qualifying conditions for carer’s allowance have significantly eased, coverage of the scheme has been extended and new schemes such as carer’s benefit and the respite care grant have been introduced and extended.

468 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Carer’s allowance, in line with other social assistance schemes, is means tested. This ensures that scarce resources are directed at those in greatest need. The carer’s allowance means test is one of the more flexible tests in terms of the assessment of household incomes. It has been significantly eased over the years, most notably with regard to spouse’s earnings. Increases to the carer’s allowance income disregard, provided for in Budget 2008, mean that, from April 2008, a single person can have an income of \332.50 per week and a couple can have an income of up to \665 per week and still qualify for the maximum rate of carer’s allowance (the previous levels were \320 and \640 per week respectively). This ensures that a couple can have an income in the region of \37,200 per year and still qualify for the maximum rate of carer’s allowance as well as the associated free travel, household benefits package and the respite care grant. This increase surpasses the Towards 2016 commitment of ensuring that those on average earnings can qualify for carer’s allowance. In addition, in Budget 2008 the maximum rate of carer’s allowance was increased to \214 per week for those aged under 66 and to \232 per week for those aged over 66, with effect from January 2008. Budget 2007 provided for new arrangements whereby people can receive a maximum payment equivalent to a half rate carers allowance while receiving another social welfare payment, other than jobseekers benefit or allowance. In June 2006 the number of hours for which a person can engage in employment, self-employment, education or training and still be considered to be providing full time care for the purposes of carer’s allowance, carer’s benefit and the respite care grant was increased from 10 to 15 hours per week. From June 2005, the annual respite care grant was extended to all carers who are providing full time care to a person who needs such care, regardless of their income. A carer who is caring for two or more people is entitled to a full grant for each of the care recipients. The rate of the grant will increase to \1,700 per year from June 2008. I will keep the supports for carers available from my Department under review in order to continue to improve the schemes and ensure commitments on income support are delivered.

Question No. 174 answered with Question No. 121.

Question No. 175 answered with Question No. 173.

Question No. 176 answered with Question No. 128.

177. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will examine the qualification for the back to education allowance with a view to extending and broadening the scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18854/08]

178. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of applications for the back to education allowance received in her Department in each of the past three years to date; the numbers approved, rejected or pending; her proposals to extend or improve the scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18855/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 177 and 178 together. The back to education allowance (BTEA) is paid at a standard weekly rate equivalent to the maximum rate of the relevant social welfare payment that qualifies the applicant for participation in the scheme. It essentially replaces their existing social welfare income and in addition an annual \400 cost of education allowance is payable. From September 2008 the annual cost of education allowance will increase to \500.

469 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.]

The current scheme is in place since January 1998 and has been subject to review and modification over the years to ensure it continues to support those people who are most distant from the labour market and whose need is greatest. Improvements include:

• In Budget 2005 a reduction in the qualifying period for access to the third level option from 15 to 12 months.

• From September, 2005, a reduction in the qualifying period to 9 months for access to the third level option for persons participating in the National Employment Action Plan (NEAP) process where a FA´ S Employment Services Officer recommends pursuance of a third level course of study as essential to the enhancement of the individuals employment prospects.

• From September, 2006 time spent in receipt of supplementary welfare allowance from the Health Services Executive or the direct provision system operated by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform can count towards the qualifying period for back to education allowance in circumstances where the person establishes an entitlement to a relevant social welfare payment prior to commencing an approved course of study.

Further improvements to the BTEA scheme came into effect from the beginning of the current academic year in September 2007. People who are awarded statutory redundancy may access the BTEA scheme immediately provided an entitlement to a relevant social welfare payment is established prior to commencing an approved course of study. The qualifying period for illness benefit recipients was also reduced from three to two years. I will continue to monitor the scheme but I believe that, overall, the current arrangements provide that my Department’s back to education allowance scheme continues to meet its objectives and ensures that limited resources are targeted at those who are most in need. The details requested in relation to applications for BTEA are given in tabular form below for the academic years 2004/2005 to 2006/2007 inclusive. There are no cases pending for any of these years.

Academic year Approved Rejected

2004/2005 7,308 1,175 2005/2006 7,285 1,002 2006/2007 8,090 1,405

179. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will increase rent support in line with economic circumstances; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18856/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The purpose of rent supplement, administered under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme, is to provide short- term income support to eligible people living in private rented accommodation whose means are insufficient to meet their accommodation costs and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source. Rent supplement is subject to a limit on the amount of rent that an applicant may incur. Rent limits are set at levels that enable the different eligible household types to secure and retain basic suitable rented accommodation, having regard to the different rental market conditions that prevail in various parts of the State. The objective is to ensure that rent supplement is not paid in respect of overly expensive accommodation 470 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers having regard to the size of the household. There are currently over 62,000 rent supplements in payment. Setting maximum rent limits higher than are justified by the open market would have a distorting effect on the rental market, leading to a more general rise in rent levels. This in turn would worsen the affordability of rental accommodation unnecessarily, with particular negative impact for those tenants on lower incomes, including people in low wage employment. Notwith- standing these limits, under existing arrangements the HSE may, in certain circumstances, exceed the rent limits. This discretionary power ensures that individuals with particular needs can be accommodated within the scheme and specifically protects against homelessness. The current rent limits were set in January 2007. A review of rent limits is currently being undertaken. A consultative process is being used to ensure that the views of all relevant parties are sought and taken into account in the process. This includes consultation with the HSE, the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Central Statistics Office, the Private Residential Tenancies Board and voluntary agencies working in this area. This process helps ensure that the new rent limits reflect realistic market conditions throughout the country. Any adjustments to rent limits, resulting from this review, will be effective from 1 July 2008.

180. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the extent to which she has met or will meet in full applications for full occupational injury payments for suffers of pneumonocosis to those deemed to suffer from illness regardless of the extent to which they are affected; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18857/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Pneumoconiosis is a prescribed disease for the purpose of the Occupational Injuries scheme administered by my Department. The legislation governing the Occupational Injuries Scheme provides entitlement to benefit for persons suffering from certain prescribed diseases which are listed in the legislation and where that person has contracted that disease in the course of their employment. Where a person has contracted one of the diseases listed in the legislation, benefits are payable if they were employed in an occupation which is specifically prescribed in relation to that disease or if they can show, to the satisfaction of the Chief Medical Advisor in the Depart- ment, that the disease was contracted through an employment not specifically prescribed in relation to that disease. Employment under a contract of service is insurable for Occupational Injuries Benefit under the Social Welfare Acts. An insured person who contracts pneumoconiosis may qualify for disablement benefit under that scheme, in addition to disability benefit under the general social insurance scheme, subject to meeting the qualifying conditions. Medical assessments are undertaken in all such cases to determine the degree of disablement, which is calculated by comparison of the state of health of the applicant with a person of the same age and gender. Persons claiming Occupational Injuries Benefit in cases of Pneumoconiosis are referred to Consultant Respiratory Physicians in the first instance for an examination and report. This examination consists of a clinical assessment and pulmonary function testing (PFT). Dis- ablement benefit is awarded on the basis of the consultant’s report, including the pulmonary function test result. The degree of disablement is expressed as a percentage of loss of faculty and the compensation payable varies accordingly. Loss of faculty may be determined within a range of less than 1% to 100%, depending on the severity of the condition. Currently, there are 25 people in receipt of disablement benefit as a result of contracting pneumoconiosis arising from their occupation, of which 20 are former coal miners and 5 were in employments prescribed in relation to asbestos. The percentage of

471 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] disablement assessed in these cases ranges from 8% to 90%. A person must be assessed as having a minimum of 20% loss of faculty before they may be considered as being incapable of work due to their disablement. Of the 25 persons already mentioned who are in receipt of disablement benefit in respect of pneumoconiosis 16 are also in receipt of state pension (contributory), 1 is in receipt of state pension (transition), 7 are in receipt of invalidity pension and 1 is at work. Where a person qualifies for disablement benefit, the rate of benefit increases on an annual basis in line with the normal social welfare budget increases. In addition, where a person feels that his/her condition has deteriorated since the assessment was made under the scheme, it is open to that person to apply for a review of the percentage calculated.

Social Welfare Appeals. 181. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will make arrangements to speed up the processing of social welfare appeals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18858/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The social welfare appeals process is quasi-judicial and the procedures are designed to ensure that every appellant’s case gets full and satisfactory consideration. The quasi judicial nature of the appeals system means that the process must be governed by fair procedures. This, of course, can give rise to inevitable time lags in processing appeals. I am advised that improving processing times is a major objective of the Social Welfare Appeals Office. However, it is necessary at all times to ensure that progress in this regard is achieved in a manner which is not in conflict with the demands of natural justice and the requirement that every appeal be fully investigated and examined on all its merits.

Social Welfare Benefits. 182. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the average time required to process an application for old age pension or similar payments; her proposals to speed up this process; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [18859/08]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Claims for State Pension (Contributory) and State Pension (Transition) are now fully processed within three weeks of receipt of the applications where all information is available. Average processing times for all claims now stand at less than 8 weeks for a State Pension (Contributory) and 5 weeks for State Pension (Transition). The Department has commenced claim initiation on the State Pension Contributory scheme whereby customers are proactively invited to claim pensions in advance of reaching pension age in order to ensure their entitlement to pension is decided by the due date. Over the past year 59% of State Pension Non-Contributory claims were processed and decided within 8 weeks. The processes involved in deciding claims for the schemes are currently being reviewed with a view to reducing the time taken to decide claims. In order to facilitate a good customer service people are advised to apply for pension at least three months before reaching pension age so that their entitlement can be determined as close as possible to the due date.

Community Development. 183. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the

472 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers progress made on the commitment given in the programme for Government to double funding for the CLA´ R programme to enable rural infrastructure deficits to be tackled. [18762/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I refer the Deputy to my reply to Question No 14 of 3 April 2008.

184. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made on the commitment given in the programme for Government to establish community and development agencies as a one-stop shop. [18763/08]

194. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made on the commitment given in the programme for Government to ensure that islands through Comhdha´il Oilea´nnahE´ ireann will have their own dedicated LEADER partnership company. [18779/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I propose to take Questions Nos. 184 and 194 together. As the Deputy will be aware from the reply given by the former Minister of State, Deputy Carey to Questions Nos. 10 and 11 of 3 April 2008, the core objective of the cohesion process is to simplify and improve local delivery of programmes operated by my Department through the integration and alignment of local delivery structures. In line with the commitment in the programme for Government, the intention is that for the future, there will be one local development company in any given area and fewer local development companies overall. The new arrangements will provide full county coverage and enable communities to more readily access services and make maximum use of the funding available. At this stage, local development bodies are in place in 54 of the 55 operational areas agreed by the Government. In respect of the islands, a new integrated structure, Comhar na nOilea´in Teoranta, was incorporated on 8 November 2007. Transitional arrangements are being made for 2008 to enable the new integrated structures to extend their areas of coverage and to embed their operations.

Departmental Reports. 185. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made on the commitment given in the programme for Government to conduct an enterprise audit to review the use of existing and redundant agricultural buildings and manufacturing plants in rural areas. [18764/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I refer the Deputy to my previous response to Question No. 131 of the 13 of March 2008.

Rural Social Scheme. 186. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made on the commitment given in the programme for Government to expand the rural social scheme to provide additional income for farmers and fisherman by increasing the number of places available. [18765/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): Currently there is a provision for 2,600 participant places and a further 130 supervisor positions on the Rural Social Scheme (RSS). All available places (both Participants and Supervisors) have been

473 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v.] allocated and quotas have been assigned to each of the Implementing Bodies. Commitments in the Programme for Government will be met over the lifetime of that programme.

Tourism Development. 187. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made on the commitment given in the programme for Government to initiate a study in consultation with Fa´ilte Ireland, LEADER companies, agricultural associations, county enterprise boards and rural tourism operators to devise a new plan for farm based rural tourism. [18768/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I refer the Deputy to my previous answer to this question on 14 February 2008.

188. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to pursue the possibility of using former railway infrastructure as recreational trails for cycling and so on in partnership with Iarnro´ dE´ ireann. [18769/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): My Depart- ment is actively pursuing the possibility of using former railway infrastructure as recreational trails — for activities such as walking and cycling — with the Department of Transport and Iarnro´ dE´ ireann. Officials from my Department have met with representatives of Iarnro´ d E´ ireann and CIE, who confirmed that, as of now, the only line abandoned and definitely available for development is Tralee to Limerick. A portion of this line, the Great Southern Trail, has already been developed as a recreational amenity. I have provided funding to Great Southern Trail to upgrade to cycling standard a section of the existing walking trail on the abandoned Limerick to Tralee railway line. My officials meet with Iarnro´ dE´ ireann/CIE regarding issues arising from Great Southern Trail and continue to explore further opportunities as they arise.

189. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to introduce an all-Ireland walkways development plan. [18771/08]

190. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to implement a major programme to promote rural countryside recreation by a dedicated unit or division of staff in consultation with stakeholders. [18772/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I propose to take Questions Nos. 189 and 190 together. I refer the Deputy to my previous response to Questions numbered 19 and 34 of 3rd April 2008. I should add that agreement has been reached with Fa´ilte Ireland for the employment of a further Rural Recreation Officer (RRO), bringing the total to be employed to 12. I understand that eight of the RROs have been recruited, with the remaining four to be employed shortly.

Offshore Islands. 191. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the

474 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to complete the infrastructure programme on the islands, ensuring low-cost high quality access services with fixed and competitive tariffs for passengers and freight. [18774/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I am pleased to advise the Deputy that very considerable progress has been made in regard to the development of islands generally and improving the quality of life for island communities. Since 1997, more than \65m has been provided by my Department and its predecessor for the development of island infrastructure. In 2008, a further \33m has been allocated for this purpose, bringing the total amount provided to date to almost \100m. This unprecedented level of investment has resulted in significant improvements to access infrastructure on and for the islands. The following examples illustrate this:

• the construction or development of piers at a number of locations, including A´ rainn Mho´ r and Machaire Rabhartaigh in County Donegal, Coney Island, County Sligo, the Clew Bay islands of Clynish, Inishlyre, Insegort and Islandmore, as well as Inis Bigil, Doran’s Point, Clare Island, Inishturk and Roonagh in County Mayo and the Cork islands of Whiddy, Bere, Sherkin, Cle´ire, Long and Heir;

• the construction of airstrips at Clifden and Inishbofin and the resurfacing of airstrips on the Aran Islands;

• the provision of new helipads on A´ rainn Mho´ r and Cle´ire;

• coastal protection and pier improvement works on Inishbofin, and

• major pier and harbour developments on the three Aran Islands: construction of a new pier on Inis Mea´in is nearing completion, while the largest development ever undertaken by my Department (in excess of \40 million) has recently commenced at Cill Ro´ na´in, A´ rainn, and plans for the development of the pier on Inis Oı´rr are also at an advanced stage.

As island access infrastructure has improved, so too have associated access services. At this stage, my Department is funding eighteen island transport services, including ferry and air, compared to just seven in 1997 and, of course, many of these older services have been greatly improved since then. The annual cost of these subsidised services is approximately \5m.The cost of transport for passengers and cargo to the islands has been a major issue for island communities. The capping of passenger fares for islanders on contracted ferries (\8 for adults; \5 for students and children) has made a significant difference in this regard, as has the reduction by nearly two thirds of tariffs on the Aran Islands cargo service and the introduction of similar tariffs on other new cargo services due to commence shortly.

Tourism Development. 192. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to develop the potential of language based and countryside recreation based tourism and services. [18775/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): In line with commitments in the Programme for Government, my Department has made considerable progress in relation to developing the potential of language based and countryside recreation based tourism and services. In relation to language based tourism and services, my Department has

475 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v.] continued to promote the Gaeltacht as a holiday destination in its own right, and, in this regard, particular emphasis has been given to the promotion of tourism on the islands. The focus is on developing products and facilities, providing specific packages for certain sectors (e.g., hotels, islands, Irish summer colleges, etc), and marketing the Gaeltacht as a place in which to learn Irish, as well as a tourist destination of outstanding merit. Examples of initiatives progressed in 2007-08 include the Ireland North West Marketing Campaign, Ireland West’s Connemara Marketing Strategy, marketing at various Holiday Trade Shows, initiation of a pilot community based project to support local product providers in delivering marketable packages to visitors, and the development of partnerships with a view to enhancing the tourism infrastructure provision in Donegal, Galway and Mayo. In 2007, employment figures in the Gaeltacht based tourism sector (language, cultural & service based activities) increased by 25% from 2006. In addition to this, strong working partnerships exist between U´ dara´s na Gaeltachta and Faílte Ireland, particularly through their regional offices and other tourism organisations, to optimise the opportunities provided by the tourism industry for the Gaeltacht. My Department has also made substantial progress in terms of enhancing countryside recreation based tourism and services. Progress to date includes: • Publication of a National Countryside Recreation Strategy in September 2006 by Comh- airle na Tuaithe; • Development and launch of the ‘Walks Scheme’ by my Department, which is currently being piloted on four routes; • Agreement with Faílte Ireland regarding the employment of 12 Rural Recreation Officers to promote walking tourism in areas where there are clusters of suitable, accessible walks; • Provision of over \1.3m in capital funding to Faílte Ireland to assist in the development of the national network of looped walks to a total of 50 trailheads and 75 loops; • Funding to Coillte Teo for a joint project with Roscommon County Council, where Coillte has provided 110 acres of land to develop Lough Key Forest Park on a long-term lease, as well as for the development of a motocross course in the Dublin Mountains; and • An allocation of \90,000 (\30,000 per annum from 2006-2008) to Wicklow Uplands Council and Wicklow Rural Partnership to provide a network of access routes over private lands in areas of high scenic and amenity value in County Wicklow. In addition, my Department is actively pursuing the possibility of using former railway infrastructure as recreational trails for activities such as walking and cycling, in conjunction with the Department of Transport and Iarnro´ dE´ ireann. I have also provided funding to the Great Southern Trail to upgrade to cycling standard a section of the existing walking trail on the abandoned Limerick to Tralee railway line. Discussions are also continuing with Coillte and Bord na Mo´ na regarding the possibility of expanding the use of their lands for recreational purposes. I will continue to progress this matter, which I believe has considerable potential to make a significant contribution to rural and countryside recreation.

Community Development. 193. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to change the law to enable U´ dara´s na Gaeltachta to provide development services on a contract basis to non-gaeltacht islands thus ensuring parity between all islands. [18777/08]

476 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): Legislative proposals in regard to the powers and functions of U´ dara´s na Gaeltachta are being considered in the general context of recommendations contained in the Report of the Linguistic Study of the Use of Irish in the Gaeltacht, which was published recently. As the Deputy is aware, a Cabinet Committee has been established to examine the study’s recommendations with a view to agreeing an integrated action plan.

Question No. 194 answered with Question No. 184.

195. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to invest through the community employment scheme, the job initiative scheme, the rural social scheme and the community services programme in providing top class community services on islands. [18780/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): In line with commitments in the Programme for Government, my Department has made considerable progress in relation to the development of community services on our islands through the Com- munity Services Programme and the Rural Social Scheme. The Community Services Programme (CSP), currently supports six community enterprises located on five islands in Donegal, Galway and Mayo. The islands are Arain Mho´ r, Inis Oirr, Inis Mo´ r, Inishbofin and Achill. The support provided is in the form of a contribution towards the wages of five managers and twenty-four full time equivalent workers. An allocation is also provided for non-wage expenses. The community enterprises, supported under the CSP, in turn provide support for various services, including support for tourism initiatives, transportation, recycling, literacy, social care, and youth support services, and also maintenance of community halls and facilities. The Department continues to roll out the Rural Social Scheme (RSS), including on our islands. Comhdhaíl Oileaín na hE´ ireann implements the RSS on the islands on behalf the Department and has a quota of twenty participant places. In 2007, eleven projects were undertaken under the RSS. In relation to the Deputy’s query regarding the Community Employment Scheme and the Job Initiative Scheme, these do not fall within the remit of my Department and are matters for my colleague, Mary Coughlan T.D. Tańaiste & Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

Recreational Facilities. 196. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to ensure that play facilities are provided on islands where necessary. [18781/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): Information regarding assistance approved by my Department for play facilities and other social amenities on islands in recent years is provided in the following table:

Island Details Amount Approved \

Inis Oı´rr Playground development 133,075 Toraigh Playground development 35,000

477 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v.] Island Details Amount Approved \ A´ rainn Mho´ r Playground development 35,000 Clare Island Football pitch 106,658 Inisturk Football pitch 169,526 Inishbofin Football pitch 27,294

Irish Language. 197. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to establish a senior officials group between his Department and the Department of Education and Science to enhance the actions of both Departments and their agencies in addressing challenges in supporting the Irish language including strengthening the teaching of Irish throughout the education system. [18870/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): A high- level group has been established at Secretary General level between my Department and the Department of Education and Science and meets periodically to consider matters of common interest in the context of the Irish language and the Gaeltacht. Joint actions arising from the work of the group are advanced through regular engagement at Assistant Secretary level between the two Departments, as well as interaction with relevant agencies, including Foras na Gaeilge, U´ dara´s na Gaeltachta and An Chomhairle um Oideachas Gaeltachta agus Gael- scolaı´ochta.

198. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the programme for Government to develop a comprehensive plan based on the linguistic study of the Gaeltacht with clear and effective measures for the continued preservation and development of the language in the Gaeltacht. [18873/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): A Cabinet level committee has been established to examine the issues in the context of the analysis and the recommendations made in the Report of the Linguistic Study of the Use of Irish in the Gaeltacht. The Committee, which had its first meeting on 10 April 2008, has been tasked with agreeing an integrated action plan within a year to ensure the preservation and development of the Irish language as a community language in the Gaeltacht.

199. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the programme for Government to provide for an extension to the Irish language network of cre`ches in the Gaeltacht. [18874/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): In general, the primary responsibility for assisting cre`ches in the Gaeltacht and throughout the State rests with the Office of the Minister for Youth and Children. However, U´ dara´s na Gaeltachta & my Department have also provided assistance for the provision of childcare facilities in the Gael- tacht in the form of capital funding and provision of suitable sites. In addition, an tU´ dara´s may also provide feasibility study grants to help community groups in Gaeltacht areas with design and other related preliminary costs associated with the building of such facilities. 478 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Designated Areas. 200. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if he has received an application from a group (details supplied), to extend the RAPID areas within their particular geographical remit; if in this context, he will take steps to include two additional estates as pointed out in a submission for inclusion in RAPID; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18908/08]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): The RAPID Programme aims to ensure that priority attention is given to tackling the spatial concentration of poverty and social exclusion within the 46 designated RAPID areas. The Government has given a commitment to continue to prioritise investment in the existing RAPID areas and no area currently included in the Programme will lose its eligibility for priority treatment. My attention at present is focused on an analysis of recent Census data with a view to ensuring that the boundaries of existing RAPID areas are appropriate. A key concern will be to ensure that the effectiveness of the RAPID Programme is not diluted and that Government action continues to prioritise and target communities with the greatest needs. The area referred to in Athlone will be examined as part of the overall analysis of Census data.

Fishing Industry Development. 201. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the operational programme for fisheries has been rejected by EU Commissioners due largely to his failure to implement a variety of EU directives; his proposals to address the issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18786/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The Operational Programme (O.P) for Fisheries for Ireland, has not been rejected by the Commission. As part of the normal consultative process for approval, the Commission adopts a negotiating position where it sets out how the OP should be improved and completed to meet the Commission’s quality requirement for the programme. The Commission Negotiating position was received on the 22nd of April 2008, officials from my Department met the Commission (DG Mare, DG Regio and DG Environment) on 24 April as part of the formal process in the consideration of Ireland’s Fisheries Operational Programme 2007 — 2013. The OP submitted to the Commission envisages the use of EU funds under the Fisheries Fund to support decommissioning of fishing vessels, aquaculture development and environmental/ inshore fisheries support. The total EU aid available under the Fisheries Fund for the period is \42m. My officials are engaging fully with the Commission to address the issues raised, including in relation to EU Directives on the Environment, with a view to agreeing the OP as early as possible.

Rural Environment Protection Scheme. 202. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will clarify whether the growing of willow crops for energy production is classified as an agricultural or forestry activity; his views on the ten metre boundary margin and 12 degrees rule for planting of willow crops; his further views on the consequences for farmers participating in REP scheme who wish to grow willow crops for energy production who feel that these regulations and others restricting the amount of lands which they can include in energy crops jeopardise their participation in REP scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18736/08]

479 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): In 2006, the European Commission classified willow as an agriculture crop. The Commission subsequently introduced Council Regulation 2012/2006 authorising Member States to grant national aid of up to 50% of the costs associated with establishing permanent crops (willow and miscanthus). This Regu- lation provides the legal basis of the Bioenergy Scheme, which my Department introduced in February 2007 to provide establishment grants to farmers of up to \1,450 per hectare to grow willow and miscanthus. The second phase of the Bioenergy Scheme commenced in December 2007 and to date applications to plant a further 1,400 hectares of willow and miscanthus have been submitted. Growing willow is a specialised activity and my Department has published Best Practice guidelines to provide advice to growers on planting and harvesting operations. This is to ensure proper crop establishment, maximise crop yield and improve the economic viability of the crop. The ten-metre boundary margin is necessary to protect watercourses. The 12 degrees rule is to ensure that planting and harvesting operations can be carried out in a safe and efficient manner. Ideally sites must have low elevation and be moderately sheltered to facilitate machine operations and to minimise potential runoff. In addition to establishment grants, areas planted with willow also qualify for the Single Farm Payment, the National Energy Crop Premium of \80 per hectare and the EU Premium of \45 per hectare under the EU Energy Crops Scheme. We also extended the aid payable under the REPS and Disadvantaged Areas Scheme to include areas planted with willow, subject to some restrictions on the areas planted. On the REPS area, under the specification for REPS 4, the maximum area of willow and miscanthus permitted on REPS farms is 10 hectares or 25% of the REPS contract area, whichever is the greater. This area limitation is in order to maintain landscape diversity. It would not be desirable or acceptable in an agri-environmental scheme to have whole farms, or a major portion of the lands, devoted to the growing of an introduced species monoculture. Existing levels of flora and fauna need to be sustained, and if possible improved, on all REPS farms and the large-scale growing of willow is not consistent with this objective. The same maximum area applies in REPS 3 but it has come to my Department’s notice that a small number of farmers have exceeded the limits. My Department is examining these sympathetically on a case-by-case basis.

Fisheries Industry Development. 203. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when grant aid programmes for aquaculture, processing and fisheries will be open to the industry to apply; when these programmes will be advertised welcoming applications; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18787/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): Grant aid schemes for aquaculture and processing measures under the European Fisheries Fund Regulation 2007–2013 will be launched as soon as the relevant approvals are in place. For measures being partly supported with EU aid, the Commission must approve the national Operational Prog- ramme for Fisheries. The Operational Programme (O.P) for Fisheries for Ireland, has been submitted to the Commission and is currently is subject to the formal process of negotiation. Schemes supported solely with national funds (including seafood processing and some aquaculture schemes) are currently being evaluated as required under the EU Strategic Environmental Directive. The schemes are planned to be launched in the autumn.

480 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Licence Applications. 204. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the position regarding licensing applications on hand; the breakdown of same under the categories of the number of new licence applications, the number of licences under review and the number of licences for renewal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18788/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): I refer the Deputy to the response to Question No. 47 of 6 November 2007 which indicated, inter alia, that 254 applications were being processed as new applications, licence renewals or licences undergoing review. Since then, the Department has received 17 new applications, 10 applications to renew a licence and 3 applications to review a licence. The licensing procedure is lengthy and complex, involving a range of intermediate measures before a recommendation and decision can be made in any one case. I should also point out that the process has become considerably more complex in recent years due to increased activity and demands in the coastal zone and the knock-on need to take an ever greater account of public safety, environmental and economic issues. I wish to advise the Deputy that a detailed examination of all applications within my Depart- ment is currently underway as a matter of urgency with a view to categorising all applications shortly, including by reference to the categories identified by the Deputy. This examination is part of a broader categorisation exercise which is one of the detailed measures being taken by my Department to successfully address the backlog in applications and is in keeping with measures recommended in the Cawley Report aimed at delivering an improved service to customers.

Fisheries Industry Development. 205. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the position regarding the negotiations process with the European Commission on Ireland’s operational programme on fisheries following the announcement in May 2008 of the rejection by the Com- mission of Ireland’s operational programme for fisheries; the way this rejection will affect progress on implementing the Cawley report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18789/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The Operational Programme (O.P) for Fisheries for Ireland, has not been rejected by the Commission. As part of the normal consultative process for approval, the Commission adopts a negotiating position where it sets out how the OP should be improved and completed to meet the Commission’s quality requirement for the programme. The Commission Negotiating position was received on the 22nd of April 2008, officials from my Department met the Commission (DG Mare, DG Regio and DG Environment) on 24 April as part of the formal process in the consideration of Ireland’s Fisheries Operational Programme 2007 — 2013. The OP submitted to the Commission envisages the use of EU funds under the Fisheries Fund to support decommissioning of fishing vessels, aquaculture development and environmental/ inshore fisheries support. The total EU aid available under the Fisheries Fund for the period is \42m. My officials are engaging fully with the Commission to address the issues raised, with a view to agreeing the OP as early as possible. A Seafood Strategy Implementation Group (SSIG), chaired by Dr Noel Cawley, has been established. This group is actively supporting and driving the delivery of the recommendations

481 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Brendan Smith.] contained in “STEERING A NEW COURSE — Strategy for a Restructured, Sustainable and Profitable Irish Seafood Industry 2007–2013” (the Cawley Report). It is not expected that the current process we are engaged in regarding the O.P will have any significant impact on the delivery of the recommendations contained in the Cawley report over the timeframe of the strategy.

Sheep Sector. 206. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his Department has considered the report on the sheep, lamb and goat sector in Europe (details supplied); if in this context his Department is considering a per ewe environmental sheep maintenance scheme; if this issue has been discussed with the European Commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18875/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): I am aware of this report which contributes to the ongoing consideration of the future of the sheep sector in Europe. In that context my predecessor raised the issue at the EU Council of Agriculture Ministers last March. Commissioner Fisher Boel has indicated that the needs of the sector would be borne in mind in the CAP “Health Check”. The mixed grazing supplementary measure under REPS 4 is already targeted at the sheep sector. This measure is being kept under review.

Farm Inspections. 207. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the progress made on the issue of adequate notice to farmers for on farm cross-compliance inspections; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18876/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The position is that a Commission report on the application of cross-compliance was presented to the April 2007 Agriculture Council and Council conclusions were adopted in June 2007. One of issues covered in the conclusions was advance notice of inspections. Council and Commission Regulations are now in place implementing the new arrangements with effect from 1 January 2008. Under the new regime, while all inspections should be unannounced, up to 14 days notice can be given for land eligibility and cross-compliance inspections involving Statutory Management Requirements (SMRs) other than those related to animal identification and registration, food, feed, and animal welfare. For checks involving cattle identification and registration the maximum advance notice is 48 hours provided the Inspector is satisfied that the purpose of the inspection is not jeopardised. For SMRs dealing with feed, food and animal welfare no advance notice may be given. The Department is required to ensure that the control environment established under cross- compliance is robust and meets with regulatory and audit requirements. Nevertheless, the Department believes that the cross-compliance provisions were overly complex for farmers and has sought and gained appropriate simplification in the context of the review of cross-compliance conducted by the Commission and the Regulations introduced as a result. It is intended however, that further simplification of the cross-compliance arrangements will be pursued in the context of the CAP Health Check. Specifically, Ireland is committed to pursuing indent 14 of the June, 2007 Council conclusions which requested the Commission “to study ways of improving the coherence and practicability of the control provisions in the differ-

482 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers ent sectors covered by the Statutory Management Requirements (SMRs) for example as regards control rates and advance notice for on-the-spot checks”.

Sheep Sector. 208. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will request the European Commission to publish a price series on retail wholesale processor and producer prices for each member State on the Internet every three months in order to ensure more price transparency within the European sheep sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18877/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): This is one of the recommendations in the report by Liam Aylward, MEP, to the European Parliament on the future of the sheep and goat sectors, which is being examined. I support the principle of maximum price transparency at all levels. In Ireland producer prices at export meat plants are published weekly by An Bord Bia. This includes a comparison with EU lamb markets. One of the recommendations of the Sheep Strategy group was a move to mechanical grading of sheep, as is done for cattle. This will provide an objective assessment of quality and enhance price transparency. My Department has facilitated trials on mechanical grading and the results are currently being considered.

Registration of Entitlements. 209. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the policy of his Department and the legal basis for same regarding treatment of entitlements in circumstances where land is being farmed in partnership and where on the death of one of the partners his Department is refusing to transfer entitlements to the surviving partner (details supplied); if in this context his Department will outline its position regarding the transfer of entitlements in a case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18878/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The rules governing the registration and transfer of payment entitlements are set out in Council Regulation 1782/2003, Commission Regulation 796/2004 and Commission Regulation 795/2004. The 40 standard entitlements in question were established by the first person named and his late brother as joint herd owners during the reference period. While the herd number previously held in the joint names of the first person named and his late brother has been transferred into the sole name of the first person named, no application has been received requesting the parallel transfer of entitlements. The first person named has submitted an application requesting the transfer of the 40 standard entitlements from himself to a third party. As the entitlements are not currently registered in the sole name of the first person named, it has not been possible to process this application. My Department has advised the first person named that he must first of all submit an application requesting the transfer of the entitlements from the joint names to his own name following which he may use them or transfer them as he sees fit. An application form to have the entitlements transferred has also been issued. To date, the first person named has not completed this transfer application. Once a Transfer of Entitlements application and any relevant supporting documentation have been received, it will be processed without delay.

483 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Grant Payments. 210. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the position in relation to REP scheme payments due to miscanthus growers; the qualifying hectarage of miscanthus which will allow farmers to make best use of the Government support schemes, that is REP scheme bioenergy scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18881/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): REPS is an agri- environmental measure, and for that reason payments to farmers must be costed and justified on the basis of quantifiable environmental benefits that go beyond keeping land in good agricultural and environmental condition and observing the statutory management requirements of the Single Payment Scheme. No element of the REPS payment can be justified on the basis of a production support, nor can a farmer be compensated for the same action twice. REPS is not a support scheme; it is a voluntary scheme open to all farmers and payments under the scheme are not entitlements as of right. Participants who agree to be bound by the scheme conditions qualify for payment. Under the specification for REPS 4, the maximum area of willow and miscanthus permitted on REPS farms is 10 hectares or 25% of the REPS contract area, whichever is the greater. This area limitation is in order to maintain landscape diversity. It would not be desirable or acceptable in an agri-environmental scheme to have whole farms, or a major portion of the lands, devoted to the growing of an introduced species monoculture. Existing levels of flora and fauna need to be sustained, and if possible improved, on all REPS farms and the large- scale growing of miscanthus is not consistent with this objective. The same maximum area applies in REPS 3 but it has come to my Department’s notice that a small number of farmers have exceeded the limits. My Department is examining these sympathetically on a case-by-case basis.

World Trade Negotiations. 211. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his proposals to address the concerns expressed in correspondence (details supplied); the proposed meetings he is seeking to arrange with other EU Agricultural Ministers within the EU to discuss the matter; his proposals to further the efforts to address the matter and to continue the forum of meetings with the EU Commission and its Commissioners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18975/08]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): There is no doubt that the current round of WTO negotiations represent a significant challenge for EU and Irish agriculture. I am very concerned about some of the proposals being made in the WTO negotiations and with the lack of balance in the process. I want to assure the Deputy that I will take every opportunity to express my concerns in the strongest terms in the various EU and WTO meetings dealing with these negotiations. Only last week I met my French counterpart in Dublin, and the current state of play and imbalance in these WTO negotiations was high on the agenda of this meeting. I can report that France and Ireland share the same concerns on the direction of these negotiations and will continue to insist that the Commission does not accept an unbalanced deal which undermines EU agricultural production. The WTO negotiations are on the Agenda of the Agriculture Council of Ministers next week and I will take the opportunity to reiterate and highlight Ireland’s concerns to the Commission

484 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers and to other Member States and to insist that any WTO agreement must be a balanced one which does not place a disproportionate burden on EU and Irish agriculture. In addition I will ensure that Ireland continues to play a leading role in the Group of 14+ like-minded Member States who have come together to express concerns in relation to the direction of the WTO agriculture negotiations. I will continue to work closely with like-minded Ministers in other Member States to seek support for my position. At official level, my Department, and other Departments involved, have and will continue to work assiduously in the various technical meetings to ensure Ireland’s interests are best protected.

School Accommodation. 212. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will list the primary and post primary schools in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18735/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I am pleased to inform the Deputy that a full list of primary and post-primary schools, on a county by county basis, is available on my Department’s website at www.education.ie.

School Staffing. 213. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will review a case for a person (details supplied) in County Meath regarding a pay scale issue; and if he will make a statement regarding teaching service given outside the EU by EU trained teachers and pay rates. [18741/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The terms of award of incremental credit to teachers are determined by the Conciliation Council for Teachers, which is the forum for the discussion by representatives of the management and staff sides of claims, terms and conditions of employment. Arrangements for the award of incremental credit for primary teachers are outlined in Circular 10/01, and any changes in arrangements would have to be negotiated through the Conciliation Council for Teachers. In this context, if the matter is to be considered by the Council, it should be raised by the teachers’ union.

Schools Building Projects. 214. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Education and Science when he will make a capital allocation for the building programme at a school (details supplied) in County Cork; when the school authorities including the board of management and principal will be informed; the length of time he expects the construction period to last; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18782/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): An application for capital funding towards the provision of a new school has been received from the Management Authority of the school referred to by Deputy. Applications for large scale capital funding are assessed and banded in accordance with published prioritisation criteria. These criteria were agreed following consultation with the Education Partners and the progression of individual projects is considered in the context of the multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Prog- ramme. It is not possible at this stage to say when construction will commence on the project referred to by the Deputy.

485 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

School Management. 215. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Education and Science if his attention has been drawn to the ongoing issues in a school (details supplied) in County Kerry regarding the teaching of subjects through the medium of Irish only; the implications of this policy into the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18785/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): My predecessor and officials of my Department met with the Trustees of the school and discussed with them the language policy of the school. I understand that the Trustees have engaged in discussions with the school’s Board of Management on the issue. The Board of Management recently contacted my Department advising that they had appointed a person to review how the school facilitates pupils with either a little or no Irish. My Department has welcomes this development and has expressed its willingness to establish a specific liaison mechanism between it and the Board through which any issues that may arise could be considered. My Department has also offered to provide any expert advice to the Board that may assist the review being carried out in the school. The Inspectorate of my Department have offered, if the Board would find it helpful in the circumstances, to have a number of subject inspections conducted to help establish how the school’s policies are impacting on the quality of learning at classroom level.

Pupil-Teacher Ratio. 216. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of primary school pupils attending schools in each county council and city council area; the number of pupils in each of those areas who are in classes of 30 or over; the number of pupils in each of those areas who are in classes of 25 to 29; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18804/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Enrolment data for the school year 2007/2008 are currently being processed and are not yet available. Schools have flexibility in the way in which they assign pupils and teachers to classes and the Department does not allocate teachers to specific classes or age groups. The mainstream staffing of a primary school is determined by reference to the enrolment of the school on 30th September of the previous school year. The actual number of mainstream posts sanctioned is determined by reference to a staffing schedule which is issued to all primary schools each year. Posts allocated on the basis of this staffing schedule are specifically for mainstream classes and should be deployed accordingly. School authorities are requested to ensure that the number of pupils in any class is kept as low as possible, taking all relevant contextual factors into account (e.g. classroom accommodation, fluctuating enrolment). In particular, school authorities should ensure that there is an equitable distribution of pupils in mainstream classes and that the differential between the largest and smallest classes is kept to a minimum. As the Deputy will be aware, major improvements have been made in staffing at primary level in recent years. There are now in the region of 6,000 more primary teachers than there were in 2002. By the 2006/07 school year, we had reduced the average class size in our primary schools to 24, while the pupil teacher ratio was 16.4:1, including resource teachers etc. In that year, schools were staffed on the basis of a general rule of at least one classroom teacher for every 28 children. Given that the national average was 24, many schools benefited from much more favourable staffing ratios than this. Extra teachers were provided by the Government for the 2007/08 school year to improve primary school staffing so that schools would generally get at least one classroom teacher for every 27 children.

486 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

A further initiative in recent years that has been of direct benefit to primary schools has been the change in the criteria for developing schools. For the current school year the threshold for getting a developing school post was reduced specifically to help schools that are seeing large increases in enrolments each year. Over 330 such posts have been sanctioned in the 2007/08 school year compared to 280 in 2006/07. The improvements we have made in school staffing in recent years are absolutely unparalleled. The Government is committed to providing more teachers to our primary schools over the next five years in order to reduce class sizes. We will also continue our focus on measures to improve the quality of education in our primary schools to ensure that increased resources lead to better outcomes for our children.

School Curriculum. 217. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Education and Science the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the programme for Government to implement further changes in the Irish curriculum, with a focus on improving young people’s command of the spoken language and move towards more marks for oral Irish in the leaving certificate examinations. [18867/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): In March 2007 plans were announced to increase the proportion of marks available for oral assessment in the certificate examinations in Irish to 40%, for pupils beginning second level schooling in 2007/8. This will impact on the voluntary oral Irish examination available as an option within the Junior Certifi- cate from 2010 onwards, and the national oral examinations in the Leaving Certificate from 2012. The measure is designed to promote a significant shift in emphasis towards Irish as a spoken language, where students can communicate and interact in a spontaneous way, and where Irish is spoken every day in schools. A subject-specific support service for Irish has been established, as part of the Second Level Support Service (SLSS), to provide professional development for second-level teachers and support the use of Gaeilge as a communicative language in schools and classrooms. The work of the support team is assisted by a professional advisory group which includes representatives of my Department, the State Examinations Commission, An Chomhairle um Oideachas Gael- tachta agus Gaelscolaı´ochta, Foras na Gaeilge and the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. To date the service has concentrated on the induction of team members and the preparation of seminars for teachers of First Year Irish. 54 seminars have been planned nationally for Term One, with the intention that two teachers of First Year Irish from all second-level schools will have had access to these seminars by the end of the current school year. Targeted seminars to teachers of First Year Irish in Irish-medium and Gaeltacht schools are also being provided. The support service has also been undertaking an audit of the professional development needs of the teachers with whom it has been working and this will inform its work into the future. The service will shortly be looking at ways to make courses available to support teachers who wish to upskill themselves in the spoken language. A co-ordinating committee, Coiste Comhordaithe na Gaeilge, has also been established to advise on co-operative elements of the overall work to be carried out on the promotion of the Irish language within the education system. The committee is comprised of representatives from An Chomhairle um Oideachas Gaeltachta agus Gaelscolaı´ochta (COGG), U´ dara´s na Gaeilge and Foras na Gaeilge. The policy of awarding bonus marks for Irish in the State examinations was introduced by the government in the 1920s as one of a number of initiatives to promote the study of subjects

487 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] through Irish, reflecting the Constitutional position of Irish as the first language. This continues to the present day in the context of wider public policy to promote the Irish language, and is a facility open to all students. I have no plans to change the policy in this regard.

In-service Training. 218. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Education and Science the progress made on the commitment given in the Programme for Government to build on the provision of in- service for primary teachers in teaching drama through Irish in the 2006/2007 school year by encouraging English medium primary schools to teach more subjects through Irish. [18868/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The Drama Curriculum contains a focus on An Ghaeilge agus Dra´maı´ocht. It advocates the use of drama in Irish and asserts that ‘the greatest benefit of drama in Irish is that it can bring fluency in the language’. The curriculum also alludes to the use of drama by the teacher ’in order to prompt and extend the use of Irish’. The curriculum supports the integration of Irish and drama and refers to the fact that such integration will assist the child’s drama education and at the same time help him/her to achieve greater fluency and expressiveness in Irish (Primary School Drama Curriculum, Teacher Guide- lines, P. 20). A team of thirty-two trainer designates was appointed to the Primary Curriculum Support Programme, (PCSP) in 2005, a year in advance of the roll out of in-service seminars. The team comprised fully qualified primary school teachers from schools of diverse backgrounds and with broad interests in drama and Arts Education. The designate trainers attended a number of training sessions during the course of the academic year 2005-2006. In addition, they explored and experimented with aspects of the drama curriculum in their schools. The training which teachers ultimately received in Drama was reflective of this broad range of experience. Drama in-service seminars were delivered over the course of two non-consecutive school closure days in 2006-2007. In addition to this, schools were also sanctioned to take one school- based planning day for Drama. In all, a total of 1,737 drama seminars were delivered to primary school teachers. A total of 39,997 participants attended the drama in-service seminars. The session of each of the drama in-service days which had a focus on ‘Dra´maı´ocht trı´ Ghaeilge’ had two aims:

• to develop drama as a subject in its own right

• to demonstrate how Irish can be used as a living language in the context of the drama lesson.

Ongoing Support In 2007-2008, the Arts cuiditheoir team continues to provide support for Dramaı´ocht trı´ Ghaeilge where they have been requested by schools to do so. One aspect of the work of these cuiditheoirı´ has been in modelling strategies which focus on Dramaı´ocht trı´ Ghaeilge in classrooms. The Gaeilge / Tu´ s Maith team has also been promoting the use of Drama as a methodology for the teaching of Gaeilge.

488 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

The Campaı´ Samhraidh initiative for disadvantaged schools will have a focus on Dramaıócht trı´ Ghaeilge. The INTO magazine InTouch published an article which aims to support Dramaıócht agus an Ghaeilge in schools, ‘I dtreo na Dra´maıóchta — October 2007’.

School Staffing. 219. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Education and Science the progress made on the commitment given in the Programme for Government to put in place new arrangements to enable Gaelscoileanna to hire teachers with a strong ability to teach all subjects through Irish. [18869/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): In relation to teaching methods my Department, through Teacher Education Section, has a wide number of initiatives in place to further develop the teachers’ competency in teaching Irish. At primary level the “Tu´ s Maith” programme is a targeted initiative designed to support the teaching of Irish. There are currently thirty — one cuiditheoirı´ on the team of trainers. The purposes of the Tu´ s Maith programme are to improve the teaching of Irish and to improve teachers’ competence and confidence in speaking the Irish language. Tu´ s Maith cuiditheoirı´ provide a range of supports to teachers including in-class support, whole school support and after-school workshops. The team is currently working with 527 Spriocscoileanna, (Target Schools), providing intensive sustained support. Tu´ s Maith cuiditheoirı´ also work with Gaelsco- ileanna. The funding currently provided for the Tu´ s maith initiative is \2.3m annually. At post primary level, a subject-specific support service for Gaeilge was established in 2007. The service forms part of the Second Level Support (SLSS) which provides programme and subject specific curricular support, and support for implementing new teaching methods in second-level schools. The funding provided for this service is \0.65m annually. The support service for Irish has been designed to provide professional development support to second-level teachers of Irish generally. One of the primary objectives of the service is to support the use of Gaeilge as a communicative language in schools and classrooms. The programme of professional development has been designed to:

• promote the importance of oral skills as an integral part of the Junior and Leaving Certifi- cate syllabuses

• enable teachers develop a range of teaching and learning strategies that will promote oral language proficiency, as recommended in Circular 0042/2007

• build on the strengths of the Revised Curriculum for Primary Schools.

My Department also provides funding of \150k per annum for the provision of Campaı´ Samhraidh in disadvantaged schools for 4th to 6th class students. In 2007 there were 10 ten schools participating in the scheme and it is anticipated that there will be twenty schools in 2008. In addition to the above at both primary and post primary level each of our support services have measures in place to provide training through Irish. In relation teaching aids, Se´idea´nSı´ is a pack of resources forming a course in Irish which was developed for Gaeltacht primary schools and All-Irish primary schools. It comprises a range of teaching materials and guidelines for teachers and pupils up to Third Class. It includes pre-reading materials, posters, prompt cards, word games, board games, rhymes, songs, picture cards, alphabet cards, books, a cd and ICT materials. At present writers are developing a package of materials for Fourth Class.

489 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.]

All of the above initiatives aim to improve the competency of students in the Irish language when they leave school. Some of these students will eventually become teachers themselves, with an improved grounding in the Irish language. As part of the minimum academic requirements specified by my Department for entry to programmes of teacher education in the Colleges of Education, all candidates must have a minimum of a Grade C in Higher Level in Irish in the Leaving Certificate or an approved equivalent. This requirement embodies both the written and oral element of a student’s proficiency in Irish and my Department considers it to be the minimum standard in Irish necessary for students entering a teacher training course which will equip them to teach Irish to pupils at all levels of the primary school. In addition in the Colleges of Education there is a separate competition for entry to the B.Ed for candidates who reside in the Gaeltacht and the normal language of whose home is Irish. The Colleges may offer up to 10% of their places to Gaeltacht candidates.

Physical Education Facilities. 220. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Education and Science if his attention has been drawn to the fact that his predecessor made a public commitment to the allocation of funding for a sports hall at a school (details supplied) in County Mayo; the reason this has not been honoured to date; when he will confirm that this project can proceed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18905/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): A tender report for the project referred to by the Deputy is currently under examination by my Department. The contract for the project has not yet been awarded. The progression of all large scale building projects, including this project, from initial design stage through to construction phase will be considered on an on-going basis in the context of my Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme. It is not possible at this stage to say when construction will commence on the project referred to by the Deputy.

Computerisation Programme. 221. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Education and Science if he allocated \30,000 for the specific purchase of computers for a school (details supplied) in County Mayo for 2007; the amount allocated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18906/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The school referred to by the Deputy did not receive direct ICT funding in 2007. The school did however receive the annual Minor Works Grant which allows schools, inter alia, to purchase IT related equipment without referring back to my Department. Over \27m was paid out to primary schools throughout the country in 2007 to enable thousands of small scale works to be completed without the need to interact with my Department. Individual primary schools received a grant in the sum of \5,500 plus \18.50 per pupil.

School Accommodation. 222. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Education and Science the position on an application for additional funding by a school (details supplied) in County Longford, which

490 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers is being examined by his Department’s review group; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18910/08]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): A grant was sanctioned in March 2007 to enable the management authority of the school in question to provide additional accommodation. The scheme is not intended to leave schools with significant fundraising needs; rather the terms of the Scheme require the schools to tailor the scope of capital works commissioned to the available funding. The decision on whether to continue participating in the scheme or to drop out, if the scope of build is more than the funding envelope permits, is a matter for each school authority. The Board of Management submitted an appeal for additional funding which was unsuccessful. They were advised to use the grant to achieve the maximum accommodation possible taking into consideration the extra cost which has arisen.

Residency Permits. 223. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position of the residency application from a person (details supplied). [18726/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): It is not the practice to comment in detail on individual asylum applications. As the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted. A final decision on this application will be made upon receipt of the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

224. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision will be made on an application for family reunification (details supplied); if all information has been provided by the applicant for a decision to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18738/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that the application made for family reunification by the person in question was refused in August 2007. She was also advised that it was open to her to seek a declaration from the Irish courts under Section 29 of the Family Law Act 1995 that the marriage in question is a valid marriage.

Citizenship Applications. 225. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding citizenship in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Louth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18800/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Officials in the Citizenship section of my Department inform me that processing of the application from the person referred to in the Deputy’s Question has commenced and the file will be forwarded to me for a decision in the coming months. I will inform the Deputy and the person in question when I have reached a decision on the matter.

491 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Residency Permits. 226. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the status and when a decision will be made in relation to persons (details supplied) in County Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18801/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Long-term residency is an administrative scheme that was introduced in May 2004 and is focused on persons who have been legally resident in the State for over five years on the basis of work permit / work authorisation / work visa conditions. Such persons may apply to the Immigration Division of my Department for a five year residency extension. In that context they may also apply to be exempt from employment permit requirements. While applications for long term residency are under consideration, the person concerned should ensure that their permission to remain in the State is kept up to date. I have been informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that applications for long term residency from the persons referred to by the Deputy were received in November 2006. I understand that applications received in August 2006 are currently being dealt with. As soon as a decision is made on the case, the persons concerned will be notified.

Garda Stations. 227. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of Garda stations in here which are e-mail enabled and can be contacted by citizens via e-mail; if he will list each of these e-mail enabled stations; when every Garda station will be directly electronically contactable; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18803/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am advised by the Garda Authorities that currently there is a pilot running in the Dublin Metropolitan Region which provides section mailboxes to all District and Divisional offices. The pilot is assessing the various factors that need to be addressed with regard to greater use of external email by An Garda Sıóchańa, including the type and volume of Garda business that can be transacted using email, the potential uses for Section and Station email and the security and resource implications for the Garda network. Internal email has been provided to all ranks of An Garda Sıóchańa via the PULSE environment. External email facilities are provided to all Gardaı´ from Inspector rank upwards as well as to members of other ranks based on operational needs. Accordingly, external email access is personnel rather than location based.

Garda Investigations. 228. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of warrants that are outstanding in each Garda division; if he will break down the total outstanding warrants for each division into bench warrants, committal warrants and penal warrants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18807/08]

229. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of warrants that are outstanding in each Garda district of the Waterford/Kilkenny division; if he will break down the total outstanding warrants for each district into bench warrants, committal warrants and penal warrants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18808/08]

492 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 228 and 229 together. In the time available it has not been possible for the Garda authorities to supply the details requested by the Deputy. I will be in contact with the Deputy when the information is to hand.

Prisoner Releases. 230. Deputy Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform further to his reply to Parliamentary Question No. 523 of 8 May 2008, the date of the decision to reject the application of each of the five prisoners. [18901/08]

231. Deputy Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform further to his reply to Parliamentary Question No. 523 of 8 May 2008, if he or officials have consulted with other parties or individuals when making his decision to refuse the applications under the Good Friday Agreement of each of the prisoners concerned. [18902/08]

232. Deputy Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform further to his reply to Parliamentary Question No. 523 of 8 May 2008, if in view of the spirit and the letter of the Good Friday Agreement he will review the decision to refuse to send the applications of the prisoners concerned, which in this instance would be four or the five prisoners to the Independent Commission as agreed under the Good Friday Agreement to allow the Commission to make their advice known in each case as is their function. [18903/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 230 to 232, inclusive, together. The decisions not to specify the prisoners as qualifying were communicated to the prisoners in question by the Prison Governor in September 2000, April 2002, December 2004 and September 2006. In the normal course my Department would seek the views of An Garda Sı´ocha´na on such applications which would then be taken into account in my formal decision. As to whether the decisions not to specify these prisoners will be reviewed, I can confirm to the Deputy that the circumstances in which these decisions were taken have not changed.

Licensing Laws. 233. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on and his plans to address the contents of correspondence (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18974/08]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am currently examining the issues raised by the Irish Nightclub Industry Association in connection with reform of the licensing laws in their recent submission.

Sport and Recreational Development. 234. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to implement proposals for a community development plan which will deliver community facilities such as playgrounds, community centres, local markets, recycling, sports and recreational facilities throughout the country, and that this plan will be underpinned by a \150 million community development fund to be established over a five year period. [18758/08]

493 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

235. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to ensure that services being delivered for towns under the community development plan are easily accessible to rural communities. [18760/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I propose to take Questions Nos. 234 and 235 together. I refer the Deputy to the reply to Questions Nos. 656, 657, 658 and 659 of Thursday, 17 April 2008. The position is unchanged.

Planning Issues. 236. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to set up a national monitoring committee to oversee the consistent implementation of the sustainable rural housing guidelines. [18770/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I refer the Deputy to the reply to Questions Nos. 249 and 250 of 3 April 2008. The Sustainable Rural Housing Guidelines for Planning Authorities were published in April 2005, and have a statutory basis as they were issued under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The Guidelines are designed to achieve a balance between a good planning framework for rural housing and the local housing needs of those who are part of, or have links to, local rural communities. In a circular letter issued in May 2005, planning authorities and An Bord Pleana´la were asked to put in place the required procedures and practices to implement the policies set out in the Guidelines as quickly and effectively as possible. My Department also held two seminars for local authority planning officials on the implementation of the Guidelines. While respecting the need to consider each planning application individually and on its own merits, planning officials were asked to ensure that the provisions of the Guidelines are applied consistently and uniformly. All planning authorities were also requested to take immediate steps to review their development plans so as to incorporate any changes necessary to promote consistency with the policies set out in the Guidelines. This has been done, with some authorities varying their plans and others incorporating the Guidelines into the reviews of development plans. The Guidelines are a material consideration both in relation to development plans and in the consideration of planning applications. Detailed application to particular planning cases is, however, a matter for the planning authority concerned or An Bord Pleana´la, as appropriate. My Department will continue to monitor implementation of sustainable rural planning policies to ensure appropriate consistency in the application of guidance across all counties.

Community Wardens. 237. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to extend the successful pilot scheme of community wardens nationally. [18773/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): The pilot community warden service, which was established in five local authorities in 2002, has since been placed on a permanent footing. There are currently 45 warden posts across these

494 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers authorities. Following a process of adjudication, the practical issues concerning the extension of the service to other local authorities have recently been settled. Accordingly, it is now open to other local authorities to introduce the scheme, having regard to local circumstances.

Planning Issues. 238. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to build on recent planning laws by setting up a national monitoring committee to oversee the clear and consistent implementation of the protections for the unique linguistic identity of the Gaeltacht. [18871/08]

239. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the Programme for Government to examine Section 10 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 that requires local authorities to prioritise the promotion and development of Irish when considering future development schemes. [18872/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I propose to take Questions Nos. 238 and 239 together. Section 10(2)(m) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 requires a development plan to include objectives for the protection of the linguistic and cultural heritage of the Gaeltacht, including the promotion of Irish as the community language, where there is a Gaeltacht area in the area of the development plan. Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Development Plans were issued by my Department in June 2007 to assist planning authorities in the preparation and implementation of development plans. Appendix C to these guidelines sets out, inter alia, further considerations for planning authorities in the preparation of development plans in Gaeltacht areas such as demographic, economic and cultural factors, as well as particular facilities appropriate to Gaeltacht areas and the administrative and management structures that might be required. These guidelines were issued under section 28 of the Act, which requires planning authorities to have regard to them in the performance of their functions. The Guidelines are available on my Department’s website at www.environ.ie. The provisions of the Act and the statutory guidelines provide a strong legal underpinning of Gaeltachta and the Irish language in planning law. I am also a member of the Cabinet Committee on Irish and the Gaeltacht which held its first meeting on 10 April 2008. I will work with my colleagues to ensure that the Committee’s programme of work is advanced, including the implementation of any necessary actions in the area of planning, to protect our linguistic and cultural heritage.

Local Authority Housing. 240. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the status of an application by Westmeath County Council to replace and renew a significant number of houses built as part of a low cost scheme in the early 1970s (details supplied) in County Westmeath; if, in view of the urgency attached to having new dwelling houses provided for the residents who have been patient in this regard, he will ensure that the appropriate financial allocation is made to the local authority to enable them to carry out this scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18734/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): The Council has already received funding of \1.1 million to undertake a pilot phase remedial

495 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy John Gormley.] works scheme in this estate. This was completed in May 2007. A proposal to extend the pilot phase was received by the Department in March 2007. The proposal, however, did not address a number of issues that arose in the pilot phase and did not meet with public procurement policy. A letter to that effect issued from my Department in April 2007. At the end of April 2008, my Department received a revised proposal from the Council and this is currently under consideration.

241. Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the criteria for assessment and approval of Respond! and Clu´ id housing; if these houses are available for purchase by the tenant; if not, the reason this social housing scheme is different to other housing schemes; if tenants are made aware of this prior to acceptance of tenancy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18737/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): The provision of accommodation by approved voluntary and co-operative housing bodies is an integral part of my Department’s overall response to delivering on social housing need. Local authorities and approved housing bodies are working in close co-operation to deliver an expanded range of social housing options and a wide range of accommodation types to meet the needs of low-income families and persons with special housing needs. Proposals for new voluntary housing schemes, including proposals from Respond! and Clu´ id housing associations, are assessed by the local authorities and my Department in accordance with the technical, financial and general terms and conditions of the Capital Funding Schemes as set out in Memorandum: VHU:2/02 and my Department’s social housing Best Practice Guidelines — Quality Housing for Sustainable Communities, details of which are available on my Department’s website at www.environ.ie. Only projects which comply with the terms of the funding schemes and which meet the local authority’s strategic housing objectives for delivering on need, are approved for funding. There is no provision at present in the voluntary housing schemes for the purchase of individual houses by tenants and this would be communicated to potential tenants by approved housing bodies in the context of pre-tenancy meetings. However, the Government’s housing policy statement, Delivering Homes, Sustaining Communities, indicated that consideration would be given, in consultation with the voluntary and co-operative sector, to piloting a tenant purchase scheme for some new voluntary homes based on the incremental purchase model. The Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which is expected to be published during the present Da´il session, will include provisions to give effect to the incremental purchase scheme. In parallel with this, arrangements for the introduction of a pilot scheme for the voluntary housing sector are being considered in consultation with the Irish Council for Social Housing.

Water and Sewerage Schemes. 242. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his proposals to provide funding to Waterford City Council to extend the main sewerage scheme to an estate (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18806/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): A sewerage scheme to serve Blenheim and other areas was sixth on the list of water and sewerage schemes submitted by Waterford City Council in response to my Department’s request to all local authorities in 2006 to undertake assessments of needs for capital works in their areas and

496 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers to prioritise their proposals on the basis of these assessments. The priority lists were taken into account in preparing the Water Services Investment Programme 2007 — 2009, which I published in September 2007 and which is available in the Oireachtas Library. Given the level of competing demands for the available funding, and the priorities identified by the elected members of Waterford City Council, I regret that it was not possible to include the Blenheim scheme in the current Programme.

243. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the status of an application by Westmeath County Council to provide essential sewerage facilities in Rathowen, County Westmeath; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18909/08]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): The Rathowen Sewerage Scheme is included in my Department’s Water Services Investment Programme 2007-2009 as a scheme to advance through planning at an estimated cost of \1.9 million. My Department is in communication with Westmeath County Council in relation the level of Exchequer funding for the scheme and a decision will be conveyed to the Council shortly.

Salmon Hardship Scheme. 244. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the funding given to each country from the hardship fund to compensate salmon fishermen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18754/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The purpose of the Salmon Hardship Scheme is to address hardship difficulties experienced by those commercial salmon licence holders affected as a result of the Government’s decision to align the wild salmon fishery with the scientific advice from 2007 onwards. The scheme is administered on behalf of my Department by Bord Iascaigh Mhara. The scheme in respect of the Foyle area is administered by the Loughs Agency. I am advised that some 994 applicants made claims through BIM. To date, offers totalling \22,707,948 have been accepted including some 120 offers which have been appealed to the Independent Appeals Officer for the Scheme. The Scheme administered by the Loughs Agency is co-funded on an equal basis by my Depart- ment and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in Northern Ireland at a cost of \3,608,124. A total of \3,006,873 has been paid out under this scheme to date. A breakdown of the funding, by county, will be made available to the Deputy as soon as it is prepared by the administering agencies.

Telecommunications Services. 245. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the programme for Govern- ment to provide broadband on all islands. [18776/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In

497 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband coverage. These include providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme (GBS) and investment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broadband services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved, including any unserved areas in the country, including inhabited offshore islands, and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remaining three candidates have now commenced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed solutions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected in mid 2008, with roll-out to commence as soon as possible thereafter. My Depart- ment has recently received notice of Judicial Review proceedings regarding certain elements of the NBS mapping process. These proceedings are currently before the Commercial Court and due for hearing on 10 June 2008. A speedy conclusion of the matter has been requested in order to advance the NBS as quickly as possible.

Alternative Energy Projects. 246. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the progress made in regard to the commitment given in the programme for Govern- ment to introduce a scheme for offshore islands to incentivise and support the production of island produced and consumed renewable energy by island co-operatives or other island-based organisations for community buildings and public lighting. [18778/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The REFIT support programme, which is administered by my Department, supports the construction of new renewable energy powered electricity production plants. This support programme is open to all qualifying projects including project proposals for the offshore islands. In addition to this general support for new renewable energy powered projects, I understand that Sus- tainable Energy Ireland has been working directly with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs over the past year in regard to conducting a comprehensive energy needs survey of the islands, using the Aran Islands as a pilot area. The aim of this survey is to assist in the development of strategies that will reduce the offshore islands dependence on fossil fuels.

247. Deputy Pa´draic McCormack asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has plans to introduce a grant aid scheme for wood log gasifiers, which is a highly efficient technology for burning wood and a carbon neutral renewable fuel resource; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18729/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Greener Homes Scheme provides support to homeowners to invest in a range of domestic renewable energy heating technologies including solar panels, biomass boilers and stoves and heat pumps. There has been a strong interest in the scheme since it was launched in March 2006. On foot of the achievement of the original scheme targets three years ahead of schedule, Phase I of the Greener Homes Scheme was closed on 3 September 2007.

498 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

Phase II of the scheme was opened on 1 October 2007 with assistance still provided under the above mentioned headings. The objective in Greener Homes Phase II is to consolidate the market, underpinning it with quality standards and training and providing for a long-term future that is not grant dependent. The aim is to ensure that the market for these products, services and fuels continues to develop strongly in a robust manner and that consumers continue to be guided towards discerning choices. Continuing the scheme is helping secure a range of objectives including more competitive offerings, revised product standards, improved training standards and stable growth across the renewable heating industry. The Greener Homes Scheme will continue to be kept under review, and will continue to evolve in light of the maturing technologies and market developments, including the consideration of additional technologies such as wood log gasifiers.

Telecommunications Services. 248. Deputy Noel J. Coonan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when the enablement of broadband will be provided at an exchange (details supplied) in County Tipperary. [18750/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of telecommunications services is a matter, in the first instance, for the relevant companies operating in a fully liberalised market, regulated where appropriate by the Indepen- dent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. I have no function in the matter of the enabling of exchanges owned by private companies. However, it is hoped that the facilitation of greater competition in the area via the introduction of broadband from different technology platforms will encourage the more rapid enabling of all exchanges for broadband. My Department operates a dedicated website www.broadband.gov.ie where potential broadband customers can establish the service providers providing a broadband service in their area. The website also lists prices of the various service levels on offer and contact details for each service provider.

Inland Fisheries. 249. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the name in respect of the years 1985 and 1995, of each of the ESB subsidiary and associate companies involved in fishery activity within the State; the percentage of ESB holdings; the activity of each company in fishery activity; the amount invested by the ESB in subsidi- aries and associates by way of shares and loans and the profit and loss position in each company; and if these companies are still trading in the State. [18892/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have been informed by the ESB that only their subsidiary company, Salmara Holdings Limited, was engaged in salmon farming from 1987 to 1995. Approval to dispose of the four offshore farms operated by the company was given to the ESB in January 1995. It has not been possible to obtain the other information sought in the time available and this will be forwarded to the Deputy as soon as it is provided by the ESB.

250. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the funding available and allocated specifically for the development of Shannon fisheries in each of the years 2000 to 2007 by the ESB for the development of the Shannon fisheries service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18893/08]

499 Questions— 14 May 2008. Written Answers

251. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if the ESB fisheries division provides him with an annual financial breakdown of profits and operating costs for the fishery activity on the River Shannon (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18894/08]

252. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if the ESB has a protection brief on the Shannon system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18895/08]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 250 to 252, inclusive, together. I am advised that the ESB controls the fishing rights of the entire River Shannon and the role of maintenance and preservation of the fishery resources is undertaken by ESB Fisheries Conservation, part of the ESB Hydro Group which operates within the ESB Power Generation directorate. I am advised that certain protection activities on the Shannon catchment are managed on behalf of the ESB by the Shannon Regional Fisheries Board. Under the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Act 1961, the ESB is required to provide me with an annual report, statistics, returns and accounts in relation to fisheries under its management. This report includes turnover, expenditure, payroll, operational costs and net loss figures which are extracted from the financial statements of the ESB for the year ended 31 December. The report includes details for the various fishery activities undertaken by ESB Fisheries Con- servation throughout the State. No breakdown of the figures is provided for the Shannon Catchment. I understand the ESB publishes and circulates the report among interested stakeholders. Copies are also available from the ESB on request.

500