Dáil Éireann

Vol. 732 Wednesday, No. 4 18 May 2011

DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

DÁIL ÉIREANN

TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)

Dé Céadaoin, 18 Bealtaine 2011.

Leaders’ Questions ……………………………… 637 Order of Business ……………………………… 644 Ceisteanna—Questions Taoiseach ………………………………… 647 Minister for Justice and Equality Priority Questions …………………………… 660 Other Questions …………………………… 667 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 679 Criminal Justice Bill 2011: Order for Second Stage …………………………… 680 Second Stage ……………………………… 680 Private Members’ Business Dublin and Monaghan Bombings: Motion (resumed)…………………712 Adjournment Debate Local Authority Boundaries ………………………… 730 Departmental Programmes ………………………… 732 RoadNetwork………………………………734 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 735 DÁIL ÉIREANN

————

Dé Céadaoin, 18 Bealtaine 2011. Wednesday, 18 May 2011.

————

Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 1.30 p.m.

————

Paidir.

Prayer.

————

Leaders’ Questions Deputy Micheál Martin: Yesterday the Dáil unanimously passed a resolution asserting our belief that the European Commission’s proposals on the common consolidated corporate tax base infringes the core principle of subsidiarity. It did this on the basis of an all-party committee report, which is a credit to the various Deputies who participated on it. One of the serious points that arose during the debate was the manner in which the position of the Minister for Finance changed because of the committee’s work. His opening position was that the CCCTB did not infringe subsidiarity and he changed this only in the light of the work and the unanimous findings of the committee members. However, many people are confused as to what the Government’s position is on CCCTB. It has gone from the clear outright opposition of last year to something described by Ministers and the Taoiseach as sceptical negotiation to constructive engagement. We would all agree that this is essentially having no impact on the negotiating position and has given the impression to others, including France and Germany, that we are open to trading on a fundamental issue such as the harmonised consolidated tax base. Because it threatens to destroy more than €4 billion in national income, the corporate tax base is as much a threat as a higher rate. We know the Government’s policy on one but we do not know its policy on the other. Every other government is clearly tabling its position on the tax base across Europe. The Dáil has taken a clear position on the tax base. Will the Taoiseach now go beyond the general ambivalent stance and the ambivalent generalities in which he has engaged up to now on the issue and tell us exactly the Government’s position, what it is prepared to put on the table and what it offers to accept?

The Taoiseach: I will. The position as far as the Government is concerned about CCCTB is very clear; there is no ambiguity here. The CCCTB is a method of tax harmonisation by the back door. It is bad for Ireland and bad for Europe. I will not sit at the table of leadership at European Council meetings and not say anything when a paper tabled by the Commission on CCCTB is being discussed. It is its right, legal duty and responsibility to publish papers or legislation, but I will not sit at the table and say nothing about this. What I will say is what I have just said to the Deputy. I do not believe in CCCTB and I do not support it. I have a very healthy scepticism about it. I hope I make myself clear in that regard.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Does that mean in essence that the Government will veto any attempt to introduce CCCTB across Europe? The Government has ranged from scepticism to engagement to constructive engagement and so on. 637 Leaders’ 18 May 2011. Questions

An Ceann Comhairle: Can we have a supplementary question please?

Deputy Brendan Howlin: Was it not clear enough for the Deputy?

Deputy Micheál Martin: We all know the financial support programme is important to the country. It is agreed across Europe that these financial frameworks and support programmes should be sustainable. The communiqué on 11 March was very clear on the matter, but nothing has happened on the Irish programme. Nothing has moved towards a conclusion on the Irish programme. The evidence coming back every day is that either Germany or France in particular have been encouraged to keep pushing Ireland for unreasonable concessions on the issue of not just the tax rate but the base because of what appears to be a changed negotiating stance on the part of the Government. The bottom line from Europe seems to be that either it wants Ireland to recover in a way which helps everyone or it does not.

An Ceann Comhairle: Can we have a question please?

Deputy Micheál Martin: We must put that very strongly to Europe. We have now had five or six weeks——

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is over his time.

Deputy Micheál Martin: ——of briefings on this. When will the issue relating to the change in the Irish programme, particularly the reduction in the interest rate, reach finality?

The Taoiseach: The Deputy and I campaigned on the Lisbon treaty. We gave the people specific assurances about tax competency being a national issue. The Government does not support the introduction of CCCTB on the basis that the Government believes it is tax harmonisation by the back door. The Government believes that CCCTB is bad for Ireland and bad for Europe. I will articulate that very clearly when it comes before the Heads of Government meeting at Council level. The governments of other countries share this view very strongly. The Deputy is aware that under the euro-plus pact it is possible for other countries to move to an enhanced co-operation position. I will not say here in the Dáil that I do not support CCCTB and then go and articulate a different position at the Heads of Government meeting.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: Will the Taoiseach veto it?

The Taoiseach: In so far as the conclusion to the question of a reduction of interest rate is concerned, there has been quite a deal of speculation about every meeting that this will bring it to a conclusion — I have never said that. The point is that the authority was given to the ministers for finance to continue negotiations on this. I would like to see it brought to a conclusion and I would like to see an interest rate reduction applied to Ireland, but I cannot give the Deputy a date as to when that will finally be concluded. As the Deputy is aware, the Heads of Government agreed in principle that countries within the EFSF bailout system should have and could have an interest rate reduction applied to them. Ireland is in that position and authority has been devolved to the Ministers for Finance to continue negotiations in that regard. I recognise the Deputy has been supportive of this process. However, I am not in a position to give the House a definitive date as to when the matter will be finally concluded. The conditions for the bailout scheme were put together by the Troika, namely, the IMF, the European Union and the European Central Bank, and also by the Government. Elements of it have been changed in respect of the minimum rate and also by the Government by way of the jobs initiative. Other countries may wish to impose conditions on Ireland that are not being imposed on any other country, which is not helpful. 638 Leaders’ 18 May 2011. Questions

Deputy Gerry Adams: It is interesting that while Greece and Portugal are having issues associated with their economic distress dealt with at European level, the Government has not even managed to get Irish issues on the agenda. Tá ceist agam faoi ard-bhaincéirí. An bhliain seo caite, dúirt urlabhraí Fhine Gael, an Teachta Richard Bruton, nárchóir dos na hard-bhaincéirí an méid airgid a mhol Rialtas Fhi- anna Fáil mar uas-theorainn, a fháil. Dúirt Páirtí an Lucht Oibre an rud céanna. I understand that in recent days AIB has made a request to the Department of Finance, contending that the cap on chief executives’ salaries, at €500,000, should be breached and salaries increased as the bank is experiencing difficulties in recruiting to fill the top jobs. As I said as Gaeilge, Fine Gael poured cold water on Fianna Fáil when it introduced the cap initially, as did the Labour Party. It is inconceivable that the Taoiseach would countenance such an increase at a time of considerable distress and when people are scandalised by the pensions paid to some bankers. Will he rule out firmly any increase in the salaries of chief executives?

The Taoiseach: Tá a fhios ag an Teachta go bhfuil caighdeán leagtha síos ag an Rialtas faoi seo, is é sin gur cheart nach n-íoctar níos mó ná€500,000 do bhaincéir, cibé cé chomh sinsearach is atá sé nó sí. There is no formal request before the Government from AIB for any particular level of remuneration. I have rarely seen people so frustrated as they are at the carry-on of some bankers during the years.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach: It is fair to say those who work in banks at the lower level have taken the brunt of the stick for those who exemplified greed and rank bad behaviour in their reckless lending practices, which practices brought the banks and, as a consequence, the country to their current position. The Government would need to see an exceptionally compelling case made by any bank to breach the ceiling. The Minister for Finance has requested an overall survey of the remuneration packages of bankers. As I said, there is no formal request before the Govern- ment in that regard. As the Deputy is well aware, it is fair to say banks threw money at people left, right and centre. It is also fair to say people borrowed money they knew they would not be able to pay back and that banks lent money they knew would not be paid back. The more bankers at the top level lent, the more they received in bonuses. That is why the Government wants to put a stop to that practice.

Deputy Gerry Adams: I again voice my frustration. I did not use the words “a formal request” but “a request”. I agree entirely that ordinary staff in the banks are taking the brunt of public anger, although they do not deserve it. However, the Taoiseach has not ruled out a breach of the cap. The problem is not just that people are angry with the bankers, but that they are also angry at the failure of the Government to intervene. The Government famously stated it could not intervene when a man walked off with a pension of €3 million. I refer to new contracts which are not the fault of Fianna Fáil but the responsibility of the Government. Any contract would have to be cleared by the Government. It cannot blame Brian Cowen, Deputy Micheál Martin or anybody else.

An Ceann Comhairle: Can we have a question, please?

Deputy Gerry Adams: I am asking the Taoiseach directly whether he will rule out increases. He said — I do not want to put words into his mouth, although he often puts them into mine — he would need to be persuaded or convinced. He needs to say “No,” that he will not countenance any increase that would bring a salary above €500,000, a huge salary for anybody to take home. It is regarded as indecent by those on the minimum wage or who are suffering 639 Leaders’ 18 May 2011. Questions

[Deputy Gerry Adams.] because of the universal social charge. Most people would regard €500,000 as a EuroMillions prize. I, therefore, ask the Taoiseach to use unequivocally a little English word: “No”.

The Taoiseach: That is a word the Deputy himself used for a very long time.

Deputy Gerry Adams: Yes.

The Taoiseach: The elected First Minister in the new Assembly in Northern Ireland regretted this morning that the Deputy was not present to send a signal of hope and confidence and point to where we are headed in a time of peace.

Deputy Gerry Adams: Is that a response to my question?

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: It involves a response of two letters.

Deputy Brendan Howlin: We will get to that also.

The Taoiseach: I am sure the Minister for Finance and I will want to see what exactly the banks are talking about when they say they need to breach the ceiling. From my experience, there are competent Irish people around the world with considerable experience in banking who would be delighted to do the job for €500,000 or less in the national interest.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: Mr. Sutherland, I suppose.

The Taoiseach: Deputy Gerry Adams referred to a payment to an individual of €3 million which was paid out last year. The case in respect of which the previous Minister for Finance was unable to prevent persons from inside the banks being appointed is slightly different from the problem that arises in that the people concerned are now in charge of the bank. There are contracts, or potential contracts, that have not come before the Government. I said I would need to see an exceptionally compelling case before any consideration would be given to a breach of the ceiling.

Deputy Michael McGrath: The Taoiseach is not saying “No.”

The Taoiseach: Deputy Gerry Adams can take it that the Government will report to him as the results of the review of remuneration packages are made known to the Minister for Finance.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: There is a banking expert in the back row; he will give the Taoiseach advice.

The Taoiseach: Since the bank in question is now being held in the interests of the people, there are many people of exceptional quality who would do the job for a salary below the ceiling.

Deputy Jerry Buttimer: The Opposition has no expert at all.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Finian McGrath.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Timmy Dooley—— 640 Leaders’ 18 May 2011. Questions

Deputy Timmy Dooley: Deputy Jerry Buttimer should not be jumping in where a man is needed. I am talking about Deputy Peter Mathews, lest there be any confusion.

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle: There is only one Deputy Finian McGrath in the House, as far as I know.

Deputy Micheál Martin: There has only ever been one.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I thank the Ceann Comhairle. Deputy Jerry Buttimer is looking for my speaking slot. I have a few questions for the Taoiseach on Queen Elizabeth’s visit to the country. Why has there been no debate on this very important matter? There are many views in the House on the royal visit.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Did the Deputy clear that with Deputy Shane Ross?

Deputy Finian McGrath: There should be an opportunity for Members to have an informed debate on the matter.

An Ceann Comhairle: Order, please.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Did Shane approve of this?

An Ceann Comhairle: Order, please.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I agree, Deputy Rabbitte, that there are Members in the Technical Group who have royalist connections.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should not be tempted to respond.

Deputy Finian McGrath: However, it is a very broad group. We have many democrats and republicans.

Deputy Alan Shatter: This is Deputy Boyd Barrett’s question.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: It is called a lucky pick.

Deputy Finian McGrath: On a serious note, why is there no real debate in this House on the visit of Queen Elizabeth? There are many different views on the matter. On the second question——

Deputy Brendan Howlin: What does the Deputy want debated?

An Ceann Comhairle: Please, give the Deputy a chance.

Deputy Finian McGrath: A Cheann Comhairle, can I ask the question?

An Ceann Comhairle: Certainly.

Deputy Finian McGrath: Will you ask Deputy Howlin to stop acting up? Does the Minister still believe in free speech?

Deputy Brendan Howlin: What does the Deputy want to debate? 641 Leaders’ 18 May 2011. Questions

Deputy Finian McGrath: He obviously still does not believe in free speech.

An Ceann Comhairle: Please proceed, Deputy. I will endeavour to protect you.

Deputy Alan Shatter: This is the equivalent of “Will somebody somewhere do something?”

Deputy Finian McGrath: With all the talk about building and developing relations between Ireland and England, does the Taoiseach agree that it was people on the ground who supported the peace process from its start with the Hume-Adams talks and that, in fact, it was the political elite and some media commentators in this country who initially attacked and did not support the Hume-Adams initiative? Also, has the Taoiseach heard of a grandmother named Joan Humphreys or a young soldier named Ben Griffin? Joan Humphreys, a British citizen who was in town last night, lost her grandson in Afghanistan and Ben Griffin is a former British soldier and veteran of Iraq——

An Ceann Comhairle: Can we have a question please?

Deputy Finian McGrath: He was also in town last night. They are here to oppose the arms industry and the fact that the British Government has recently sealed a deal with Saudi Arabia.

Deputy Alan Shatter: Were they in town or on the town?

An Ceann Comhairle: Can we have the question?

Deputy James Bannon: He has a script.

Deputy Finian McGrath: Has the Taoiseach heard of these people and what is his position on those international issues? I have a further question——

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: How did that question come out of the lucky pick?

An Ceann Comhairle: Please allow the Deputy to speak. He is already over time and I am having enough trouble trying to accommodate him. Give the man a chance.

Deputy Finian McGrath: The reason I am over time is the heckling.

An Ceann Comhairle: I know, but you were responding to it as well.

Deputy Finian McGrath: Historically, it was politicians, governments and monarchs that started wars and conflicts, not ordinary people. Does the Taoiseach accept that there are elected Members of this House, and many more elected representatives in Scotland, England and Wales, who do not support monarchies or outdated institutions with inherited powers? Does he agree that such institutions are relics of feudal times and will the Taoiseach today stand by the Republic?

The Taoiseach: That was a Second Stage speech appropriate for the committee on foreign affairs, the committee on European affairs or perhaps for overview debate on the Dáil. The Deputy has been asking about debates being held on a range of issues. He asked why there is no debate about the visit of Her Majesty, the Queen of England, but he has not mentioned the forthcoming visit of the American President and other visits that will follow. The Deputy has been complaining about too many debates yet he also wants debates. He wants the arms issue and Afghanistan raised. I do not know Mrs. Humphreys but I am sure she speaks from conviction when speaking about her family’s involvement and the consequences of that. 642 Leaders’ 18 May 2011. Questions

The Deputy referred to the Hume-Adams talks. People across a broad spectrum have contributed to the peace process. The jigsaw that has been put together has not been confined to any group or individual. People in all parties have contributed to this, and some have obviously come further than others. We want that to continue. People now understand that in a democracy one can have a different point of view but through the secrecy and influence of the ballot box, communities can thrive, work and co-operate together in the interests of the people. In the most recent examination of this, the Assembly elections in Northern Ireland, not one of the 582 local authority seats and 108 Assembly seats went to any splinter dissident group. This speaks for the power of the judgment of the people of Northern Ireland in those elections. If the Deputy wishes to hold a debate on this, he should raise it at the relevant Oireachtas committees after they have been set up next week or the whip for the Technical Group could raise it in a general sense when the House is sitting for longer periods, including on Fridays.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I thank the Taoiseach for his response but I am a little concerned about his dismissive reaction. I am open to the idea of having a debate on the visit of President Barack Obama because many of us have differences of opinion on policy issues. Those two issues should be debated in this House as well as in the broader society. I have a further question about two matters that arose today. First, would the Taoiseach agree that truth and reconciliation arise from openness and that we must have this in the debate here on the peace process? With regard to the Taoiseach’s meeting with Mr. Cameron this morning, did the Taoiseach raise the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and will Mr. Cameron open the files on the 1974 massacre? Second, when they were in Islandbridge this morning did the Taoiseach or anybody else think of the families in Greysteel and Loughinisland, when those five UDA brigadiers——

An Ceann Comhairle: Sorry, Deputy——

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I would like to have heard the debate in the Technical Group about this.

Deputy Finian McGrath: We are all for making peace with one’s enemies——

Deputy Alan Shatter: Is the Deputy in favour of it or against it?

Deputy Michael McCarthy: He does not know.

Deputy Finian McGrath: ——but we must also ensure the victims’ voices are heard. It is appropriate that I raise those concerns.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: On a point of order, a Cheann Comhairle.

An Ceann Comhairle: There are no points of order on Leaders’ Questions.

The Taoiseach: I do not treat this in a dismissive manner. Any issue raised in the House is worthy of debate, and I have outlined how the Deputy would have an opportunity to have a conclusive and constructive debate on the issues he raises. I did not raise the Dublin and Monaghan bombings with the Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron, because I have not met him yet.

Deputy James Bannon: He is getting his wires crossed. 643 Order of 18 May 2011. Business

The Taoiseach: However, I gave an undertaking in the House yesterday to raise the matter with him when he arrives here this evening and I will do that. I was not in Islandbridge this morning for the commemoration ceremony by the President and Her Majesty, the Queen. However, my thoughts were with the relatives of those who lost family members many generations ago. They had fought, in their belief, for king and country and the freedom of small nations. I think in particular of the gentleman from County Westmeath who was interviewed on the RTE news, who said that he attended the recent opening of a peace park in my native town which commemorates the loss of those men who fought in the armed forces not just in the Great War but in other wars around the world. Of course we think about them, which is why it is necessary not just to have words but also the symbolism and power of what it means for countries to join together to build continued peace in our world. For that reason I was happy to see the response of the people to the visit of Her Majesty at the invitation of the President. It is not just talking about peace building but demonstrating that in 2011 the Queen of England is prepared to come here and respect and 2o’clock understand the different traditions on this island by laying wreaths both at the Garden of Remembrance and the memorial in Islandbridge. These two leaders, the President and Her Majesty, send out a statement of co-operation and mutual respect and understanding that is global in its impact and consequence.

Order of Business The Taoiseach: It is proposed to take No. 3, Criminal Justice Bill 2011 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. Private Members’ business shall be No. 19, motion re Dublin and Monaghan bombings, resumed, to conclude at 8.30 p.m. if not previously concluded.

An Ceann Comhairle: There are no proposals to be put to the House. I call Deputy Micheál Martin on the Order of Business.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Will the Taoiseach clarify when legislation relating to the pensions fund levy will be introduced and if work is progressing on it?

The Taoiseach: The Cabinet will clear the Bill in the next two to three weeks.

Deputy Gerry Adams: We continue to pay ground rent to absentee English landlords. This includes ground rent on the National Library and on Government Buildings, where the Taoiseach will meet the English Queen and the British Prime Minister. What plans does the Government have to introduce legislation to end this practice?

An Ceann Comhairle: Is this promised legislation?

Deputy Gerry Adams: I hope the Taoiseach will promise legislation.

An Ceann Comhairle: I do not think there is any promised legislation in this area.

The Taoiseach: I do not think any legislation has been promised here. I know that under existing legislation, it was possible to buy out ground rent a few years ago. My own constituency office in the west had to buy out the ground rent from the agent of Lord Lucan. There was a sizeable number of rents there over the years. I do not know if the legislation in this area has been changed, but there is no promise of legislation to deal with the specific issues raised by the Deputy. I will examine whether it is possible under the previous legislation.

An Ceann Comhairle: You can also table a parliamentary question on the issue. 644 Order of 18 May 2011. Business

Deputy Gerry Adams: Does the Taoiseach think it is acceptable that we should paying ground rent for Government Buildings?

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not a matter for the Order of Business.

The Taoiseach: The payment of ground rent is not confined to the buildings mentioned by the Deputy.

Deputy Dara Calleary: I sought information from the Taoiseach yesterday on the construction contracts Bill. He was not in a position to give me a date, but one of his colleagues announced this morning that it will be before the House within two weeks. Can the Taoiseach confirm this? In advance of the Taoiseach’s meeting with President Obama next week, does he intend to raise the issue of the undocumented Irish and the reforms——

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not a matter for the Order of Business. Is there promised legislation on the first issue?

The Taoiseach: That will be taken this session by the Minister with responsibility for public expenditure and reform. The Minister of State at the Office of Public Works is looking at adjustments to the current situation. It is a priority and will be taken this session as soon as possible. I am aware of the difficulties that some people are facing at the moment.

Deputy Michael McCarthy: There is an enabling provision in the public health (tobacco) amendment Bill to combine text and photographic warnings on all tobacco products. When can we expect the legislation to be published?

The Taoiseach: The heads of that Bill were cleared last week and it will be finalised later in the year.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: Can the Taoiseach confirm whether a supplementary budget will be brought forward for the health Estimates, in view of the fact that the nursing home support scheme has been suspended by the health Minister’s organisation, the HSE?

An Ceann Comhairle: You cannot do that on the Order of Business.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: This is a key——

An Ceann Comhairle: I appreciate that it is very important. You do not need to explain that to me.

Deputy Billy Kelleher: It is important to find out whether a supplementary budget will be brought forward, due to the fact that the HSE has now suspended the nursing home support scheme.

The Taoiseach: There is no proposal for a supplementary budget. This is a budget capped scheme. The Fair Deal was introduced and €1 billion was made available for it. The Minister for Health and Children is examining where that money has gone. Applications will continue to be accepted and processed.

Deputy Micheál Martin: There is a motion on the Order Paper, which if accepted by the Taoiseach, will enable the Minister, Deputy Howlin, to be accountable to the Dáil. I noticed during Leaders’ Questions today that he came forward with great vigour and verve. He is straining at the bit to be accountable to the House. I ask the Taoiseach to take him out of his 645 Order of 18 May 2011. Business

[Deputy Micheál Martin.] misery and allow him to be accountable to the House, which he so eagerly wants to be, judging from his interventions with Deputy McGrath earlier.

The Taoiseach: Deputy Howlin is not a person of misery, but a man of continued optimism——

Deputy Micheál Martin: Set him free.

The Taoiseach: ——as he faces the challenge of crossing the mire left by Deputy Martin and his cronies in the last Government.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach: A Bill relating to the issue will be published on Friday and will be taken in the House the week after next.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: There are two reports to be submitted to the Dáil under today’s Order Paper. No. 7 on the Order Paper contains the 2009 financial statements for Tolco Limited and No. 9 contains the 2009 report and financial statements for Eastern Vocational Enterprises Limited. Those companies operate under the HSE and apparently they both have liquidated the pension scheme for their staff, senior carers who have done a very important job in our country. Would the Taoiseach refer those two documents back to the HSE for further clarification? The SIPTU trade union is attempting to secure pensions for long-serving carers who work for both of those organisations which are now being liquidated.

An Ceann Comhairle: This is not for the Order of Business.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: It is on today’s Order Paper. Will the Taoiseach refer the issue back to the HSE, given that there is a major problem with pensions?

The Taoiseach: That is a matter for the House.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: In answer to Deputy Higgins’s question yesterday on the taxi industry, the Taoiseach indicated there would be a review of that industry. Does he envisage legislation flowing from this to improve regulation of the industry? Will he ask the Minister to consider checking the vehicles that were checked by the staff who have been suspended?

An Ceann Comhairle: That is not for the Order of Business.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: The Taoiseach made a pre-election promise on political reform to give voting rights to the diaspora for the presidential election. Will the Government consider fast tracking legislation to afford a right to Irish citizens living in Ireland, but outside the 26 Counties, to participate in the election of the first citizen?

The Taoiseach: There is no legislation promised in this area.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: As part of the jobs initiative last week, the Minister for Finance announced that €136 million would be spent on capital expenditure, of which €106 million was the reallocation of moneys that had already been voted through this House. I asked him last week to clarify the projects that would not now be funded as a result of that.

An Ceann Comhairle: Will you put down a parliamentary question on this?

Deputy Timmy Dooley: I have already done that. 646 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

An Ceann Comhairle: Then try it again.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: The Taoiseach indicated that the Minister would come before the House and tell us clearly what projects would not now be funded.

An Ceann Comhairle: That has nothing to do with the Order of Business.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: It does. I am wondering if the Taoiseach will provide time under the Order of Business so that the Minister could come in here and clarify those projects that would not now go ahead.

The Taoiseach: The Finance (No. 2) Bill will be taken next week and all of these matters can be debated in considerable detail.

Deputy Michael McGrath: The Reuters news agency reported the Minister, Deputy Howlin, as saying that the Government wished to restructure the national debt, whereas earlier this week the Minister for Finance denied that at the European Council of Finance Ministers. Does the Government intend to bring forward proposals for restructuring the national debt? Perhaps the Taoiseach might clarify the communication issue between the Ministers.

The Taoiseach: The Reuters news agency took down the headline which misinterpreted the Minister’s comments. If by “restructuring” the Deputy means either defaulting or extending the period of repayment, neither of these two options is being considered by the Government. We have entered into an agreement and a programme. We seek an interest rate reduction and we continue to seek improvements in the nature of the deal, but we have no intention to look for an extension of time or defaulting in any way on the payments that are due by this country, which is a legacy from the previous Government.

Ceisteanna — Questions

————

Cabinet Meetings 1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach his plans regarding the holding of Cabinet meetings outside of Dublin [9563/11]

The Taoiseach: I have no plans to hold Cabinet meetings outside of Dublin.

Deputy Micheál Martin: In times past there was a move away from what was a rigid approach to the holding of Cabinet meetings. The holding of Cabinet meetings outside of Dublin was a good innovation, in bringing the work of Government closer to the people in terms of developing participation in democracy, etc., and I ask that it be considered again. On many occasions when Cabinet meetings were held outside of Dublin they were held on non-sitting days and they helped make Tuesdays more productive. Would the Taoiseach agree to the moving of Cabinet meetings to Mondays which would enable the Dáil to have more time, and a fuller day in terms of its work, on Tuesdays?

The Taoiseach: During the period 2000 to 2006, there were nine Cabinet meetings held outside of Dublin and during the Presidency in 2004, a number of meetings were held in Farmleigh. Other meetings were held in Farmleigh between June 2002 and July 2010. In the context of Dáil reform, I would not object to having a number of meetings outside of Dublin but the focus of the Government at present is on the three principal areas of dealing 647 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

[The Taoiseach.] with the banks, dealing with the employment situation and dealing with focusing on the budget deficit issues. For the moment, my intention is that Cabinet meetings will continue to be held here in Dublin. I am not adverse to having a number of meetings outside of Dublin but I will probably wait until next year before considering that. In respect of holding Cabinet meetings on Mondays, there is a matter of practicality and convenience here. The Dáil will be sitting for longer periods from September on and it might be appropriate to consider what best we do. There will be longer Dáil sittings and Tuesdays have been particularly convenient for most members over the years.

An Ceann Comhairle: Question No. 2.

Deputy Micheál Martin: On a supplementary——

An Ceann Comhairle: Sorry.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I have two.

An Ceann Comhairle: No, we are only taking Question No. 1.

Deputy Micheál Martin: This is a supplementary to it.

An Ceann Comhairle: You have got your answer. You asked a question and got an answer.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Surely I am entitled to a supplementary.

An Ceann Comhairle: No, you are not entitled to a supplementary.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I thought I was.

An Ceann Comhairle: Under Standing Orders, you are not.

Deputy Micheál Martin: The precedent in this House——

An Ceann Comhairle: Only that if this——

Deputy Micheál Martin: ——since time immemorial has been that a person has been allowed a supplementary question, particularly if it is the Leader of the Opposition.

An Ceann Comhairle: No, no. If you look at the Standing Order, it is to elucidate information that one had not got in the original reply.

Deputy Micheál Martin: There is one final clarification I want to get briefly. The Taoiseach mentioned earlier today——

An Ceann Comhairle: The reason I say this is we are not getting through enough questions. We are spending a long time on one question and other Deputies do not get a chance to get their questions answered.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I would say——

An Ceann Comhairle: If the House wants to change Standing Orders, I will apply them.

Deputy Micheál Martin: From my observations, I would argue——

An Ceann Comhairle: There is no point in arguing with me. 648 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I just put forward the point to discuss with you that we have been very reasonable and responsible on this side of the House in how we are asking questions and supplementary questions——

An Ceann Comhairle: Okay.

Deputy Micheál Martin: ——compared to anything I have seen previously here. We have been extremely reasonable and constructive about them and I have not written at any time.

An Ceann Comhairle: If you ask a question——

Deputy Micheál Martin: All I want is to simply ask a basic question. We have heard much about longer Dáil sittings, etc. It seems perfectly logical, if the Taoiseach wants more time for the Dáil, that the Cabinet should sit on Mondays, as I stated earlier, and that the Dáil could then sit earlier on Tuesdays. So far, in the past ten weeks, we have had debate after debate of statements. We have not had a great deal of legislation in the past ten weeks. It is time for the Taoiseach to put aside optics and be practical about what could happen here. I am saying Cabinet meetings on Mondays would allow for fuller days on Tuesdays and more time if that is what people want.

An Ceann Comhairle: This question was about——

The Taoiseach: Deputy Martin is late enough——

An Ceann Comhairle: Sorry, Taoiseach. This question was about the holding of Cabinet meetings outside of Dublin.

The Taoiseach: ——asking the Taoiseach about this. His party was in government for a long time and did sweet damn all about Dáil reform.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I agree.

The Taoiseach: The position is that most of the legislation that the previous Government was dealing with is either to be amended or rewritten. In fact, pieces of legislation that were clearly promised as priorities by Deputy Martin’s party in government were only that — empty promises. The debates that we have had were requested by Members of the Opposition. We have had a number of those. We start with the new legislation being dealt with today, next week and the week after. If one looks at the record of this Government even in the past eight weeks, we have ended the practice of not coming back on Tuesdays after bank holidays and will proceed to implement a series of changes with the co-operation of the other Members to make this place more meaningful from the autumn session on, which will commence early in September. I hope that we have a thorough discussion about the practicality and the credibility of making changes that are relevant in all Deputies’ interests to be delivered by the Ceann Comhairle in respect of whatever the House decides.

Office of the Attorney General 2. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the administrative changes which have been made in relation to the drafting of legislation by or under the supervision of the Attorney General’s Office. [9564/11] 649 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

3. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach the form of reorganisation, if any, that has been undertaken in the office of the Attorney General; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11451/11]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together. The Office of the Attorney General is organised into two legal areas, one to provide legal advice and the other to produce legislative drafting. These two functions are supported by a shared administration service. The office constantly reviews its staffing resources, their organisation and workload and, as necessary, adapts to meet the demands of its clients. The changes can be relatively modest, for example, with a staff member transferring between specialist groups within the office or going on secondment to a Department. On other occasions there can be a more fundamental redistribution of staff and legal topics, both to develop staff expertise and to take into account rising or decreasing workloads in any particular area of law. At the start of this year such a reorganisation took place in the advisory area of the office following staff changes and a review of the volume and type of work routinely being received. There are five legal groups in the office and the reorganisation involved a redistribution of the specialist topics dealt with by each group as well as the movement of staff members to ensure that the composition of each group is sufficient to carry out their work. The office has also reduced its staffing numbers by 14 over the past two years. In order to maintain core services, that is, legal advice and legislative drafting, the office reorganised its administration areas to absorb the reductions.

Deputy Micheál Martin: In the programme for Government, and, indeed, in the Govern- ment’s legislative programme, the Taoiseach made a series of specific commitments on the legislative process. In particular, he promised that the early drafts of legislation would be brought before the House for debate before Bills are formally published. This has not happened on any occasion in the case of any legislation so far this term. Is this because of delays in or capacity issues within the Office of the Attorney General, or is there some other reason we are not getting the earlier drafts of Bills? For example, there was no reason the most recent Bill, the Criminal Justice Bill 2011 from the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, could not have been published in draft form because it was already prepared by the outgoing Government. What is the reason we have not had these drafts?

The Taoiseach: The reason is that we have not yet agreed the changes in terms of Dáil reform. I want to see that happen and I will make it happen, but I want to discuss that with Deputy Martin’s party, other parties and Members so that we can get agreement on how best to achieve that. It would be valuable that when heads of Bills are being produced by Ministers and presented to Cabinet, and being approved by Cabinet, they would be referred to the relevant committee to get a political response. It would be in the interests of everybody as that Bill would proceed to Committee Stage and one would get a reflection from practical politicians as to whether it is relevant or irrelevant, or should be changed, amended or whatever. The reason one has not had it heretofore is because we have not agreed the range of Dáil reforms. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, is working on that. In conjunction, through the Whips and the different parties, I hope that we can get agreement on a comprehensive range of changes, one of which will be that very fact. 650 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

Deputy Gerry Adams: Caithfidh mé ará go bhfuil freagra an Taoisigh ar an gceist seo an- soiléir. Tá mé fíor-buíoch as.

The Taoiseach: Go raibh maith agat.

Deputy Gerry Adams: Bheadh mé níos sásta dá mbeadh sé an-soiléir ar a lán ábhair agus ceisteanna eile a chuirim air. Anyway, go raibh míle maith agat. The Taoiseach stated, as I understand it anyway, that the Government acts on the legal advice of the Attorney General. I know of no case where previous Governments, even where confidentiality is not required, has published that advice. Would the Taoiseach as a matter of policy, where it is appropriate, make public the advice of the Attorney General on matters of public interest?

The Taoiseach: Neither do I know of occasions where the Attorney General’s advice has been published. The Attorney General has a constitutional responsibility to be the legal adviser to the Government. The Government takes that advice into consideration before it makes its decisions. I do not see any change in current practice that might require publication of the legal advice of the Attorney General to the Cabinet of the day. The important thing is that Cabinet decisions are clear, transparent, accountable and debated.

Deputy Micheál Martin: In the Taoiseach’s reply, he outlined that over the past two years there has been a staff reduction of 14 in the Attorney General’s office. Looking at the scale of legislation promised for the remainder of the year, there is a case to be made that perhaps the capacity does not exist to process all of this legislation in this timeframe unless significant changes are made either in the Attorney General’s office or in the way Bills are drafted such as the use of outsourcing, which, to be blunt about it, has always been frowned upon by the system, in terms of giving this capacity to others. I had experience of this with regard to one famous Bill. Given all that has happened on the economic side as well as the significant workload pressures on the office, what are the Taoiseach’s observations on whether the legislative programme that has been published and promised is deliverable from the existing capacity in the Attorney General’s office?

The Taoiseach: I will have to report further to the Deputy on this matter. I took the opportunity to attend the legislation committee last week. I think it was the first occasion that any Taoiseach attended a legislation committee dealing with the Whips, the Attorney General and the Parliamentary Counsel. The “A” list of legislation which is published is a list of Bills that can be delivered in this session by the various Ministers in Cabinet. However, I must tell the Deputy that I have asked the legislation committee, including the Attorney General and the Parliamentary Counsel, to bring forward the absolute requirements on which the Oireachtas must deliver with regard to Bills that must be delivered within a certain time arising from the IMF-EU deal. I will report to the House as soon as I have clarification on this. It is not a case of the Attorney General’s office and the Parliamentary Counsel not being able to produce legislation. I want to commend them on the fact they have worked weekend after weekend on Saturdays and Sundays dealing with elements of legislation, and Deputy Martin is well aware of this. Often, to be honest, it is that Ministers have not had the practice of being sufficiently clear in the policy requirements which need to be drafted. It is not just a case of stating one wants to introduce a Bill about concept “X”. Unless clarity is given by the Minister or Department on what is being sought in legislation, it is difficult for the Parliamen- tary Counsel and the Attorney General’s office to enshrine it in the appropriate legislation. This is an issue about which people must become aware. 651 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

[The Taoiseach.] Outsourcing has proved to be very costly in the past. I am not sure of the number of Bills that were outsourced during Deputy Martin’s party’s time in government. A number of specialist shorter-term contracts have been issued to people of exceptional competence who have expertise in a particular area of law. This has proved to be useful as an additional source of potential for the Attorney General’s office.

Ministerial Responsibilities 4. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the arrangements he has put in place to coordinate the work of Ministers of State. [9565/11]

5. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself that he has put in place arrangements for Ministerial responsibilities which adequately reflect his principle priorities. [9566/11]

6. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the extent of his coordinating role regarding the work of all Ministers and Ministers of State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11452/11]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 to 6, inclusive, together. The programme for Government sets out the Government’s priorities and my statement to the House on 9 March nominating Ministers and setting out the restructuring of Departments reflected these priorities. The programme was adopted by the Government at its first meeting as the framework for its policy over the coming years. Ministers of State are appointed by the Government. When I announced these appointments in the House, I set out the Departments and areas of responsibility to which the Ministers of State were being assigned. Ministers and Ministers of State will be working together to progress those actions and initiatives that fall within their Departments’ area of responsibility in order to achieve the implementation of the programme for Government. The Government is a collective authority. The work of Ministers of State is of course co- ordinated through the operation of Government. I intend to meet Ministers of State on a regular basis to discuss progress on implementing the programme.

Deputy Micheál Martin: It is fair to state that the Taoiseach appointed three Ministers of State more than he stated were required, but he still left some very important areas uncovered. After very negative feedback, he agreed to extend two remits to include older people and drugs policy. In an honest bona fide way, I wish to put to the Taoiseach that there is concern about the apportionment of ministerial responsibility in the drugs area. It has been separated from responsibility for community development for the first time in 16 years. It is accepted that dealing with the drugs issue should be in the context of a community-wide response. Will the Taoiseach commit to revisiting how the drugs policy is handled and give it to a Minister of State as a full responsibility together with community development?

The Taoiseach: In the transfer of responsibilities and the establishment of new Departments, consideration must be given to all of this. The Minister of State, Deputy Róisín Shortall, deals with drugs and I am quite sure she will be prepared to have a comprehensive debate in the House whenever Members wish about the evolution of dealing with the drugs phenomenon, the difficulties this causes in so many communities, the information being brought forward to Deputies about activities with criminal intent, the use of certain persons, including children, in the transfer of drugs from one community to another and the wreckage this inflicts on people’s lives. This issue goes beyond mere party politics, and the Minister of State, Deputy Shortall, will be happy to have a debate whenever the House so wishes. 652 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

Deputy Gerry Adams: My question is about the extent of the Taoiseach’s co-ordinating role regarding the work of Departments. For example, particular issues affect children, including children with disabilities or learning difficulties. Issues also affect adults with disabilities, and huge issues, such as suicide, exist just below the surface. Such issues might cut across four, five, six or seven Departments and it is necessary to get a joined-up approach so the Government can deliver on these matters. I know this is a new Government but my experience, limited although it might be, particularly in the Northern Assembly, has been that where one could get strategic joined-up cross-departmental focus, one could get very quick delivery. Has the Taoiseach examined doing this? I could use any issue as example but I will take that of children with disabilities. Their parents may have to go through a plethora and maze of processes to try to get the child’s entitlement. Suicide and self harm are also issues that cut across many Depart- ments. As a job of delivery, will the Taoiseach take one of these issues and try to co-ordinate the work of the necessary Departments?

The Taoiseach: I recognise this is a difficulty, which is precisely why the Government on my nomination created a senior Ministry to deal with children and youth affairs. Over the years, I have heard many examples of parents who were frustrated and driven to the point of despair trying to access facilities, resources and rights for their children, covering a broad spectrum. In many instances, they had to face court cases to get facilities from Departments of State. This is why the Minister for Children will seek to address these problems. I recall that when the former Minister of State, Austin Currie, was appointed with responsibility for children many years ago, he discovered that sections of various Departments had never consulted with each other, had never met each other, and in some cases did not even know that sections existed in other Departments. This is why the Minister, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, will bring clarity and action to this area. The legislation setting up her Department will be published on 3 June and will give definition and responsibility in an area we consider to be an absolute priority. That is reflected in the appointment of a senior Cabinet Minister to deal with it.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Two of these three questions were mine. One question was on co- ordination and the other was on prioritisation. I mentioned the drugs policy earlier. The allocation of Ministries and remits is wrong and could undermine accepted analysis and approaches to the drugs issue. Will the Taoiseach look again at how the responsibilities have been allocated? Having been involved in the establishment of the Office of the Minister for Children, having worked with the Minister of State with responsibility for children and having seen how the office has worked over the years in terms of co-ordination and delivery of policy across the board, lumping disability, equality, mental health and older people together under one Minister of State is perhaps too onerous and does not do justice to older people. Children benefited from the co-ordination that resulted from the establishment of the Office of the Minister for Children, including the national children’s strategy and so on, and the policy of having a Minister of State with responsibility for older people should have continued because the issues are enormous and wide-ranging in terms of an aeging population and, thanks be to God, one that is living longer because of modern advances in medicine and so on. A wide range of issues need to be dealt with and justify the allocation of a specific Minister of State to embrace the issues of older people and to co-ordinate all the issues which challenge older people in modern society. A mistake has been made by not doing that.

The Taoiseach: The question was about the number of Ministers of State. This Government believes it should get a more effective response with a much smaller number of Ministers of State, who will have to do more work. The work being carried out by the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, in the mental health and older people areas is complementary to that 653 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

[The Taoiseach.] of the Minister for Health and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, where it impacts on the lives of children. This is a case where we must get it right. The responsibilities allocated to the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs will be connected very directly to the work of the Ministers of State who deals with community, drugs, mental health and other areas affecting young people and will build a sense of community response from the Departments of Health and Education and Skills or Departments affecting children and young people. One can argue about this until the cows come home but we made a conscious decision to reduce the number of Ministers of State to get more from less and to build a delivery of public service for all these people in a leaner, more efficient and more professional way. That is why, at Cabinet level, the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs will work with her colleagues in the Departments of Education and Skills, Health and Justice, Equality and Defence and with the Ministers of State with direct responsibility.

Deputy Gerry Adams: I wish the Minister, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, well in her responsibilities. She can be assured of co-operation from our party and she will know that Deputy Ó Caoláin has done some exemplary work on the issue of children’s rights. On my question on the co-ordinating role — I accept entirely the examples the Taoiseach has given — it could be used across the whole range of governance, for example, on all-Ireland and cross-Border issues. One of the things which frustrates me, and I am sure every Deputy, is that we can deal with individual cases in that someone will come into our advice centres and we may, through diligent work, help that person but there are thousands or perhaps hundreds of thousands of people we cannot help because we need to make societal change to ensure the issues pressing down on people are rectified and addressed properly. I commend any effort to co-ordinate the work of the Departments to adopt that cross- departmental approach and I assure the Taoiseach of full co-operation from our party in so far as it can help in those matters. Will the Taoiseach make clear that this will be his approach on all those issues in the term of this Government?

Deputy Noel Harrington: Will the Taoiseach consider nominating a Minister of State with specific responsibility for the offshore islands to co-ordinate the policy approach?

The Taoiseach: What was the question?

Deputy Noel Harrington: I asked whether a specific Minister of State would take control over co-ordinating policy for the offshore islands.

The Taoiseach: I can answer “Yes” to the latter question from Deputy Harrington. I commend Sinn Féin for its participation in, and valid contribution to, the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children. If we do nothing else over the next number of years, we should be able to focus on providing a platform for all the children of this island to be able to compete with their peers internationally and on giving them the best education we can provide and the best opportunity to enable them to compete, to live up to their potential, to give vent to their creativity and imaginative qualities and to continue to keep the reputation of this country and its people at the highest possible level as they stand on the competitive platforms in a world that is changing rapidly.

Departmental Staff 7. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the staff arrangements for the Government Information Service, including personnel contracted or seconded to the service; the responsibil- 654 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions. ities of all personnel attached to the Government Information Service; his plans, if any, to expand the number of personnel assigned to the Government Information Service above the level in place upon the Government’s formation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9569/11]

The Taoiseach: There has been no increase in the number of staff currently working in the Government Information Service. The number of staff in the GIS, which includes the Govern- ment press office, the communications office and the Government’s news website Merrionstree- t.ie is 19, 13 of whom are civil servants. There are two journalism graduates on contract and the remaining four, which include the outgoing Government press secretary, who is staying for a short period of transition, are political appointees. They are broken down as follows: the Government press secretary, the deputy Government press secretary, an assistant Government press secretary, five press officers, a press and information officer and seven administrative-clerical staff. The Government press office and the Government Information Service provide an information service on Government policy to the public through the national and international media on behalf of myself, my Department and the Government. It also promotes a co- ordinated approach to media matters across all Departments. The Government press office and the Government Information Service, in conjunction with the Department of Foreign Affairs, organises and manages the media aspects of State visits and major State occasions. Staff in the Government press office and departmental press officers are available after hours and at weekends to answer media queries.

Deputy Micheál Martin: As everyone is beginning to notice, most of what the Taoiseach said before 25 February must be re-examined to see if it still applies. The Taoiseach was extremely clear in his attacks on the Government Information Service and about the work of press and communications in Government Buildings prior to 25 February. In light of the fact he has retained all the functions of that office and most of the people who work there, is it not time he did the decent thing and withdrew all of his partisan comments and attacks on their past work and his central allegation which he repeatedly made in the past that all they produced was partisan propaganda?

The Taoiseach: The Deputy made the valid statement that he was not interested in a Punch and Judy show — nor am I. As he knows, the current GIS has grown from the early days when there were only two major broadsheets to a point now when instantaneous information is available through a whole range of press releases, e-mails, podcasts and webcasts, text messages and so on. From that point of view, what is on www.merrionstreet.ie is factual news and is not altered to be party political.

Deputy Joe Higgins: Will the Taoiseach elucidate on the mysterious, anonymous spokes- persons weakly quoted as sources for the Government who sometimes make very authoritative statements? How does the system work? Who are they and do they have favourite journalists whom they call in the dead of night to make serious revelations on behalf of Ministers or the Taoiseach, fly various kites and send up balloons to see which way the wind is blowing? In a supposedly modern and democratic system it would be much better if, rather than being an anonymous Deep Throat, the spokesperson concerned said on behalf of the Taoiseach what he wanted to say at 11 p.m. and gave the message to the nation. This may also apply to the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn. Would that be a better way to proceed at this time rather than by way of this ridiculous, old Fleet Street style journalism?

The Taoiseach: The media do not want to wait until 11 p.m. for an answer. If the Deputy ever becomes a Minister, he might find himself in a situation where he is involved in one 655 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

[The Taoiseach.] meeting or another and media sources are looking for answers immediately. At that point one of his press staff might say, “This is what the Minister wants to say.” In some cases a spokesman may be attributed. Sometimes I cannot find out who they are. I like to think Ministers are clear in what they say, but it may be the case that on some occasions they are en route to Brussels or involved in meetings when media outlets request an immediate response. On such occasions a spokesperson — anonymous or otherwise but certainly not Deep Throat cells — will respond on behalf of the Minister and the Department. There is nothing mysterious about it. In this case Ministers are happy to respond on issues relevant to their responsibilities.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I welcome the Taoiseach’s response and take it from his statement that what emanates from the Government website and the Government Information Service is not propaganda or partisan in party political terms, and that he withdraws from all the attacks he made on the service repeatedly for over two years. I acknowledge his withdrawal of the remarks he made.

The Taoiseach: I can confirm that the Government press website, www.merrionstreet.ie, no longer carries any Government propaganda.

Deputy Gerry Adams: I appeal to the leader of Fianna Fáil and the Taoiseach to leave the past behind.

An Ceann Comhairle: I do not think a response is necessary.

Deputy Micheál Martin: It is about the future. There is no better practitioner of the art of spinning than the leader of Sinn Féin.

The Taoiseach: If Deputy Gerry Adams has left the past behind, he should be in Dublin Castle this evening.

State Assets 8. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if, following the transfer of staff and the establishment of a new economic secretariat in his Department, his Department will play any substantive or distinct role in the process of evaluating which State assets should be sold. [9865/11]

The Taoiseach: As the Deputy is aware, the report of the review group on State assets and liabilities was recently presented to the Government. The Government is considering the findings of the report and its extensive recommendations in detail. As stated in the programme for Government, assets will only be sold when market conditions are right and adequate regulatory structures have been established to protect consumer interests. As the Head of Government, I will contribute to the decision-making process on the sale of State assets, as appropriate. However, the Minister with responsibility for public expenditure and reform has lead responsibility for policy in this area. As such, any questions on these issues, including future parliamentary questions, might be addressed to him.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I have asked the question on the basis that the small economic unit has been transferred from the Department of the Taoiseach to the emerging Department under Deputy Brendan Howlin. The sale of State assets is a fundamental issue that the Government has indicated it will address. Will the Taoiseach have available to him within his Department independent advice to enable him to take a broader perspective than a line Minister on a specific issue such as the sale of a specific State company? Will the Minister concerned have 656 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions. independent advice within his or her office to make an assessment of the merits or demerits of any decision that may come before him or her?

The Taoiseach: I attend the economic management council with the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Minister for Finance and the Minister with responsibility for public expenditure and reform. Any question of that nature will come before the council which is a Cabinet sub-committee. The Cabinet must also give its approval to any proposals coming from any Minister on the potential sale of State assets. The Government has set out the sale of non-strategic State assets, as may be appropriate in market conditions, up to a value of €2 billion in the period of office of the Government. While Mr. McCarthy published an extensive list of potentially saleable non-strategic assets, amounting to €5 billion, the Govern- ment will consider the report and under the conditions I mentioned, the Cabinet will make its decision. As head of the Cabinet and the person who chairs meetings of the economic management council, with my staff I have plenty of independence advice to make a contribution and a judgment on anything that comes before us.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Will the Taoiseach articulate to the House what he considers to be a strategic and a non-strategic asset?

The Taoiseach: A strategic asset would be the transmission system for the ESB or the gas lines. These are strategic assets that are of importance to the State. Non-strategic assets are not absolutely essential to the economic well-being and continuation of the State. A number are listed by Mr. Colm McCarthy in his report. Under appropriate market conditions and having made a decision on what is a non-strategic asset, the Government may make a decision in that respect.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Can I have the Taoiseach’s opinion?

The Taoiseach: I will send the Deputy a list of what I consider to be non-strategic assets.

Deputy Gerry Adams: On a related matter, the Taoiseach has twice mentioned my non- attendance at events involving the Queen of England. While I respect his right to attend and that of the President to invite the Queen of England, I also have the right not to attend. While I represent a constituency in the State, I am from the North. County Mayo is no longer under the control of the English Crown. Where I come from is, even in a conditional way, covered by the new dispensation we have carved out. Rather than making snide remarks back and forth, the Taoiseach needs to remember that there are people in the North, sometimes referred to as Northern Nationalists, who are watching every single comma and dot. I hope there will be good will as a result of this visit, but while the country is partitioned, as it is——

An Ceann Comhairle: We are on a different question.

Deputy Gerry Adams: I understand that, but the Taoiseach has raised this issue on a number of occasions. I ask him to respect my right as a democrat and an Irish republican——

An Ceann Comhairle: Not on this question.

Deputy Gerry Adams: ——and someoneone who has contributed and will continue to contribute to bringing about the unity of our people. I ask that my view be respected also.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: Will the Taoiseach clarify his response to Deputy Micheál Martin? It is still not clear to me where the buck stops on the State assets we will have to sell at the behest of the European Union and the IMF as part of their package. Who will make 657 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions.

[Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett.] the final decision? Deputy Brendan Howlin and other Ministers may have an input, make recommendations and examine the McCarthy report. Surely, given something as serious and disastrous as a demand to sell State assets to pay off banker debts, the bottom line should be with the Taoiseach. Is it not also necessary for the Taoiseach to define somewhat more clearly than he has in his response, strategic as opposed to non-strategic assets? A couple of “strategic” examples are given but the Taoiseach referred to the McCarthy report, and the definition of “non-strategic” in it is preposterous.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is there a question?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I will be brief.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should be brief. Other Deputies are indicating.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: For example, the report suggests that harbours and ports are not strategic assets in an island nation.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy cannot do this on Question Time. We are not here to debate that issue.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: It is crazy.

Deputy Paudie Coffey: Will the Taoiseach confirm if part of the EU and IMF bailout deal agreed by the last Government was that State assets be sold? Is it clearly defined in the agreement? Was it made clear at the time of the deal what was non-essential and, conversely, essential? Is it being left to the Government to establish the criteria to define the issue. It seems obvious that the deal was already done by the previous Government.

Deputy Micheál Martin: There has been change.

Deputy Paudie Coffey: This Government has been left to deal with the matter. The establishment of criteria should be clarified.

Deputy Clare Daly: That is the excuse anyway.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: I also have a question.

An Ceann Comhairle: We will come back to the Deputy. The Taoiseach will reply to the two supplementary questions.

The Taoiseach: I will be crystal clear for Deputy Boyd Barrett. The decision rests with the Cabinet and the Dáil. The programme for Government is what we have set out to implement during this Government’s term of office and it is very clear. It states that the Government will give effect to the sale of non-strategic State assets to the tune of €2 billion over this Govern- ment’s lifetime. The Government will consider how that can best be achieved on the basis of appropriate market conditions and in consideration of what is not a strategic asset. The Dáil will be fully appraised and allowed to discuss the matter. I hope that is clear. In respect of Deputy Coffey’s contribution, the previous EU and IMF deal recommended that a sale of State assets should be used for debt forgiveness only. The Minister responsible for public expenditure dealing with the matter was party to the negotiations which changed the deal with the troika in a number of areas, one of which is in respect of any sale of a non- 658 Ceisteanna — 18 May 2011. Questions. strategic State asset. On a case by case basis that would be examined in the context of investing that money in job creation and job initiatives.

Deputy Micheál Martin: On a point of order, the Taoiseach is misleading the House. I quoted verbatim from the EU and IMF deal negotiated by the Government and it does not state anything of the sort. It actually states the opposite.

The Taoiseach: The Minister is dealing with this.

Deputy Micheál Martin: The Taoiseach should check the record.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I am aware of the——

Deputy Micheál Martin: It is important that the record be corrected. I am alerting the House to a serious error.

The Taoiseach: It is not to mislead the House at all.

Deputy Micheál Martin: It is there in black and white.

The Taoiseach: I am aware of the wording in the document. I am also aware that the Minister with responsibility was a party to the negotiations. The Minister for Finance and the Minister for public expenditure have an agreement with the troika that in respect of any individual sale of a non-strategic State asset, on a case by case basis that can be considered for investment in job creation. That is the negotiated position between the Ministers and the troika despite the wording in the document.

Deputy Micheál Martin: That makes absolutely no sense.

An Ceann Comhairle: I did not call the Deputy. He cannot jump up and down without going through the Chair.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I do not want to do so.

An Ceann Comhairle: I will not allow the Deputy to do it.

Deputy Micheál Martin: The agreement produced by the Ministers is different to that which was put before the House and debated. That is the complete opposite of what the Taoiseach has just said. That is treating the House with disrespect.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is also treating the House with disrespect.

Deputy Micheál Martin: This is absolutely unbelievable. There should be some respect.

An Ceann Comhairle: We have now run out of time for questions.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: A Cheann Comhairle——

An Ceann Comhairle: The time is up. I ask Deputies to read the Standing Order relating to parliamentary questions and the right of Deputies — which does not automatically exist — to put supplementary questions. I have been here almost 30 years and Question Time is becoming a total joke. People are tabling parliamentary questions but five or six questions are being answered during the session. The goal of parliamentary questions is to seek an answer; if Deputies are not happy with an initial answer they are entitled to elucidate. Not every Member is entitled to jump up and ask a supplementary question, and the Deputy asking the question 659 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions

[An Ceann Comhairle.] is entitled to an answer. I will be fairly strict from now on unless Standing Orders are changed. As I have stated before, the current process can be very unfair to other Deputies who table questions that we do not reach. I do not want to get into any arguments or rows with Deputies. When Deputies ask a supplementary question, there is no permission to start making statements. A question is just that. I will be fairly strict from now on because the current system can be grossly unfair to Deputies.

Priority Questions

————

Crime Levels 33. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his response to the latest statistics regarding offences committed by persons released on bail; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11946/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I am conscious of public concern about the extent to which offences continue to be committed by persons on bail. I share that concern. Our bail law must be continually reviewed to ensure that all possible avenues are taken to protect the public against the commission of crime, particularly serious crime, by persons on bail. In doing this, we have to take account of the restrictions which exist from the provisions of our Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights on the extent to which the right to bail can be limited. My Department is engaged in work to consolidate and update bail law with a view to presenting a clear, accessible and modern statement of the law. In the context of that modernisation of the law, I will seek to restructure the law so that it has a focus on the protection of the individual and the protection of the public. My intention is that the new 3o’clock proposals will provide better guidance to the courts on how such protection might be provided. I also take the opportunity to introduce some general improvements to bail law to improve the overall working of the bail system. In the coming weeks, I will bring proposals to Government on the matter. In bringing forward my proposals, I have to be conscious of the likely effect on prison accommodation, which, as the Deputy will appreciate, is under severe pressure.

Deputy Dara Calleary: I welcome the Minister’s commitment on bringing forward new proposals and I am conscious of the difficulties that arise in respect of prison accommodation. I will focus on the serious offences that have been committed, although I do not want to fall into the argument taking place across the water because every offence is serious. In planning prison accommodation, consideration should be given to restricting bail for the offences of murder, manslaughter, sexual assault and personal assault or where the possibility arises of witnesses being intimidated. The murder of a relation, sibling or spouse is already a dreadful experience but if the offender is supposed to be in custody for another offence it must appear to the relatives that the State has failed in its duty of protection. It is very difficult to justify a murder by somebody who should be in the custody of the State. If the bail laws are being reviewed, perhaps consideration could also be given to the guidance offered to judges and the Prison Service. What level of co-ordination exists between the Courts Service and the Prison Service in regard to the number of spaces available in prisons when sentences are imposed? Co-ordination is needed on the number of daily vacancies in prisons if we are to tighten up this issue. 660 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions

Deputy Alan Shatter: There are not what I would describe as daily vacancies in the prisons. The reality is that our prisons are severely overcrowded. It is a matter of great concern to me that such is the case. It is a consequence of appallingly bad planning by the previous Govern- ment over a period of 14 years, which has created the anomaly that approximately 15% of those who should be serving prison sentences are currently on temporary release. I agree with the Deputy regarding the circumstances that require the courts to be very cautious in granting bail and trying to avoid, in so far as it is ever possible to do, circumstances in which someone who is granted bail commits a serious crime, be that murder or another offence. The proposal in the Bill, on which considerable work has been undertaken, provides that the courts must have regard to the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or the public posed by the release on bail of an accused person and the persistent nature of offending by an applicant for bail. If someone is a continuous offender it is of particular importance that he or she is not given repeated grants of bail that allow him or her to re-offend. I am particularly conscious that there is a problem in this area. There will be guidance for the courts as to the circumstances generally in which bail should be refused for people charged with certain types of serious crime, essentially, offences punishable by 15 years imprisonment or more. Such offences include murder, manslaughter, drug trafficking, organised crime and rape, as well as certain offences in the white collar area to which this should perhaps also apply. Detailed consideration is being given to the matter and I reiterate that we have to be careful to ensure we that approach it in a manner which does not result in us being in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Our primary concern is to ensure that while preserv- ing the principle that people are innocent until they are found guilty, we also protect the general public and potential victims of crime from those who have already been charged with an offence and whose history makes it clear they pose a real and present danger to the public.

Proposed Legislation 34. Deputy Jonathan O’Brien asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to update the personal insolvency laws and when he intends to do this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12046/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: A personal insolvency Bill is in the course of being developed in my Department to provide for a new framework for settlement and enforcement of debt and for personal insolvency. I have engaged in detailed discussions with officials in my Department with regard to the content of such a Bill. The provision of this legislation is a commitment under the EU-IMF programme and is intended for publication in the first quarter of 2012. However, it is my objective to publish, if possible, the measure ahead of the EU-IMF deadline given the importance of addressing this area of our law and putting it into a modern framework. In developing the Bill, account is being taken of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission in its recent report on personal debt management and debt enforcement. That report provided an in-depth review of the personal debt regime. The economic and financial effects of certain of the new arrangements are being carefully assessed to ensure that all relevant issues are addressed and their impact is fully anticipated and understood. It must be clearly understood that the reform of the law with regard to bankruptcy and insolvency is not simply a matter of a change of legal structure. There are consequences of an economic and financial nature which impact on individuals and the wider community in the context of the reforms we ultimately adopt. The civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill, which is being drafted with a view to publication as soon as possible this year, will contain some interim measures on reform of the law on 661 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] bankruptcy. The previous Government published a Bill which contained certain measures in that area and I have engaged in a review of that legislation. There will be some modification of its content, as will be clear when the new Bill is published. As it stands, the Bankruptcy Act 1988 does not meet the needs of modern social and economic conditions. Consideration is currently being given to the specific measures that will be contained in this Bill, which I envisage will comprehensively reform the law in this area.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: I welcome the Minister’s comments on the legislation due for the first quarter of 2012 in regard to his desire to introduce it ahead of schedule if possible. The recent comments by the Master of the High Court, Mr. Ed Honohan, focused our attention on the stark reality faced by many families. This House spent several days discussing the issue of suicide. Mr. Honohan’s comments on the actions of banks which are pursuing people for mortgages, credit card debt and personal loans gives rise to the question as to how these institutions operate. When one considers that most of these loans have already been written off by the banks, this behaviour is a disgrace. In regard to the legislation the Minister hopes to introduce before the end of the year, how quickly does he think he can have it prepared? How complex is the issue and will the legislation cover all forms of personal debt and debt forgiveness?

Deputy Alan Shatter: What is envisaged is the enactment of comprehensive legislation in the area of insolvency which will substantially reform current law and provide new structures to facilitate addressing issues of debt. The structures will vary depending on the level of debt and the nature of the debts held by the individuals concerned. I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that as we are in the developmental stages of the legislation I do not wish to address it in full detail at this stage. It will reflect some of the proposals in the reports that have been published but will not rigidly stick to them because we are looking at better and more realistic solutions in some areas than those which have been proposed. The legislation is scheduled for publication in the first quarter of 2012. With the assistance and support of my officials in the Department, the work we are doing has led us to be optimistic that we can publish the Bill ahead of schedule. It is usually the opposite in the case of legislation. However, I do not want to give a specific date. If we do not manage to publish the Bill ahead of schedule, I give an absolute commitment that it will be published early in the first quarter of 2012. However, I am hopeful we will see it some time prior to Christmas. I am aware of the remarks made by the Master of the High Court, Master Honohan, and am certain he means well in highlighting an issue that is of concern to many people and of which he has been made aware by way of proceedings in his court. However, Master Honohan referred in his comments to his proposed solution to all of this as a “back of the envelope” solution that appeared to be very simple. It is anything but simple, and indeed back of the envelope solutions can be extraordinarily dangerous. It is correct to say that in the due diligence that has been undertaken on financial institutions there has been factored in possible losses that may arise, for example, in the home mortgage area. However, there is a national interest and hope that some of those losses will not materialise and that people will be able to meet their financial obligations. We must be wary in how we draft this legislation to ensure we do not precipitate some additional financial difficulty or crisis that should be avoided and that we do not create a situation where people who can meet their financial commitments are provided with a mechanism simply to renege on them to the overall detriment of the community and to the further detriment of our financial institutions. While I am anxious that we introduce comprehensive reform we must do so bearing in mind the economic circumstances and the 662 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions financial impact of any reforms that may be introduced while having a clear vision of the social issues that must also inform the legislation.

Legal Services 35. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if there is a system of redress for those who engage legal professionals whereby they feel they have been over- charged for services rendered; if so, the system concerned; the role he plays in respect of this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11721/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I have no function as Minister in the investigation of complaints against a solicitor or barrister for overcharging. Generally, when a person takes issue with costs incurred as a result of a legal action he or she opts to have them taxed by the Office of the Taxing Master. The Taxing Master, as a court officer attached to the High Court structure, provides an independent and impartial process of assessment of legal costs which intends to achieve a balance between the costs involved and the services provided. Once an application has been made for a taxation of costs it must be demonstrated to the Taxing Master that costs incurred were proper and reasonable in all the circumstances. Where there is a dispute between a solicitor and a client with regard to the solicitor’s costs or the cost of counsel instructed to represent an individual, what is known as a solicitor and own client bill of costs is taxed before the Taxing Master, that is, the Taxing Master assesses whether it is financially appropriate. At the end of the process a certificate of taxation is issued based on the determination of the Taxing Master and is legally enforceable. There is an appellate procedure to the High Court where matters are not resolved to the satisfaction of either side. At Circuit Court level the taxation of costs is provided by the relevant county registrar. In parallel to the Taxing Master both the Law Society and the Bar Council have substantial mechanisms in place to deal with complaints of overcharging of clients by solicitors and barristers, respectively. The Law Society’s powers in relation to the charging of excessive fees are provided for in section 9 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act 1994. Where a complaint of overcharging is made to the society by or on behalf of a client of a solicitor, the society is required to investigate the complaint and to take all appropriate steps to resolve the matter by agreement between the parties. The society may, if satisfied that the bill of costs is excessive, direct the solicitor to refund the client without delay or waive the right to recover specified costs. Section 14B of the 1994 Act, inserted by section 41 of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2008, provides that the issue by a solicitor of a bill of costs that is excessive may constitute misconduct. In more serious cases of overcharging a complaint of misconduct may be referred by the society to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal established under section 16 of the 1994 Act. The tribunal is appointed by the President of the High Court to investigate complaints of misconduct against solicitors. It has limited judicial powers and its function is to establish, by evidence and documents, the facts of a complaint and to decide whether misconduct is proved. Where there is a finding of misconduct, the tribunal can itself impose a sanction on the solicitor, or it may refer its finding and recommendation to the President of the High Court who will decide on the nature of the sanction to be imposed on the solicitor, which can range up to striking the solicitor off the roll. The Bar Council’s complaints scheme is provided for under the Disciplinary Code for the Bar of Ireland. Complaints of misconduct against barristers may be made to and investigated by the Barristers’ Professional Conduct Tribunal whose decisions may be appealed to the Bar- risters’ Professional Conduct Appeals Board. 663 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions

[Deputy Alan Shatter.]

Additional information not given on the floor of the House. The tribunal is composed of nine members — four barristers and five lay members. The appeals board is composed of five members, three of whom are not lawyers. The board is chaired by a retired judge of the Supreme Court. Where the tribunal upholds a complaint of misconduct against a barrister it may impose one or a combination of disciplinary measures. These may include requiring the repayment of specified fees or ordering the barrister to forego the payment to him or her of specified fees. In the event that fees are not repaid as ordered within a specified time the barrister is suspended from the Law Library until such time as the fees are repaid. The modernisation of the system of taxation of legal costs I have referred to earlier is among the matters I am providing for in the legal services Bill referred to in the Government’s legislative programme. Since the Bill will have substantial implications for the Office of the Legal Services Ombudsman, provided for, among other matters, under legislation of 2009, to oversee the handling by the Law Society and Bar Council of complaints against solicitors and barristers, I have delayed the appointment of a person to that office.

Deputy Catherine Murphy: Is it open to the State to appeal to the Taxing Master and, if so, has it ever happened? In the case of a recurring misconduct, which may not necessarily be of a very serious nature, is there provision for the name of the solicitor in question to be published? It would assist people who need to consult a solicitor or barrister to have access to information indicating a profile of continuous complaints against a particular professional. The Minister’s reply indicates that he considers there is sufficient legislative provision in this area and he did not indicate an intention to introduce any type of modification. In most cases where one engages a professional to do a job one can quantify the job and obtain an estimate, but that is not generally the case when it comes to legal fees. In family law cases, for example, it is difficult for people to evaluate legal costs, which may cause great distress at a later date. The ideal is not to go the legal route but rather to find some way of mediating disputes, but this is not always possible. Is the Minister considering any measure to assist people to obtain an accurate estimate of legal costs so there can be some degree of certainty before an action commences?

Deputy Alan Shatter: I thank the Deputy for asking so many questions. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle may not allow me to answer all of them but I will do my best to work my way through. On the first issue, the State can appeal to the Taxing Master but the reality is that the State is not normally in conflict with the Chief State Solicitor’s office over a costs issue. However, if, for instance, the State or a State agency instructs private solicitors to represent it for some particular purpose and there is a dispute about fees, the State could take the matter to the Taxing Master. Proceedings before the courts relating to the State or in which the State is involved frequently find their way into the adjudication process of the Taxing Master. For example, if the State is a successful defendant in court proceedings it may get an order for costs against the plaintiff or applicant and may want to recover legal costs. In those circumstances the Taxing Master may adjudicate on the appropriate sum if agreement is not reached on the matter. In the context of transparency, contrary to the Deputy’s perception I do not consider the law as it currently stands in this area satisfactory. It is contained in a variety of legislation some of which goes back to the late 1800s. Some of it is contained in rules of the courts, be it rules of the superior courts or lower courts. We are currently undertaking substantial work on a 664 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions legal services Bill which I hope will be published during the course of this year and which must be published under the terms of the IMF-EU agreement. Initial work was undertaken by the previous Government on this legislation but I have revisited it and it will be substantially different and more reforming. It will address issues such as legal costs and mechanisms to resolve disputes and it will ensure in so far as it is possible that there is a degree of knowledge on the part of a client of the legal profession as to what costs may be incurred. In some areas, it is impossible to give an accurate prediction as to what someone’s legal costs will be. A provision in section 68 of the Courts Act 1994 requires lawyers to advise clients in advance either of the specific costs they will incur in court proceedings or to set out in detail the factors that would be applicable to calculating costs. One of the great difficulties, be it in family law or other types of litigation, is that a lawyer can rarely accurately predict how many court hearings may be required when people are heading into court or what difficulties may arise in accessing information and documentation. This results in different bills of cost being furnished to different individuals based on the background circumstances of their own proceedings. It is important that we have a modern framework of law in this area and substantial work is being undertaken to provide one.

Prisoner Releases 36. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the progress made to date on the issue of electronic tagging. [11947/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 provides for the introduction of electronic monitoring, or tagging as it is also known, in this jurisdiction. My predecessor made the relevant order in 2010 commencing the provisions in the context of a restriction of movement condition applying to the granting of temporary release. In tandem with the publication of the discussion document on the management of sex offenders in 2009, a project board was set up to examine electronic monitoring, EM. The board recommended that a pilot project be initiated to test EM technology in this jurisdiction and assess its value for money in the management of offenders. This recommendation was accepted and a decision was taken to explore, on a pilot basis, the use of global positioning system, GPS, satellite tracking monitoring technology on a small number of volunteer prisoners. Following a public tender competition, the Irish Prison Service has tested the use of this technology on 31 prisoners who were given temporary release. The test phase began in August 2010 and ran until Christmas. The group of prisoners involved were carefully selected, having regard to a range of criteria, including the nature of the offence, public safety and overall conduct in prison. I am informed that prisoner compliance was high and only one prisoner was recalled due to a curfew violation. Now that the test has been completed, a comprehensive review of its viability in the management of offenders along with a cost benefit analysis is under way and this process will be completed by the end of September.

Deputy Dara Calleary: The director general of the Prison Service confirmed the Minister’s comment that a cost benefit analysis is under way. Is he planning in the context of next year’s budget for his Department to submit an Estimate for the roll-out of the scheme, depending on the findings of the cost benefit analysis? During Question Time on 7 April, the Minister stated that he was anxious to introduce legislation in this regard but there is no commitment to a legislative initiative in this area in the programme for Government. Does he intend to legislate for this in a new Bill or by amend- ing existing legislation? 665 Priority 18 May 2011. Questions

Deputy Alan Shatter: As the Deputy will be well aware, I cannot anticipate what funding will be available to my Department for 2012. However, as he accurately recalled, this is a useful mechanism to use within the criminal justice system. I am conscious of the pilot project and I am anxious not to prejudge it. In the context of the cost benefit analysis I hope it will be shown to be a beneficial way of dealing with certain types of prisoners within the criminal justice system. It may avoid, for example, the necessity to remand prisoners pending hearings for certain criminal prosecutions. This may provide a way of freeing spaces within our prison system and render it less costly for prisoners to be kept under supervision than under the present system, which requires that they be detained in prison. It could also be of use in the future to the parole board but I want to see the result of the cost benefit analysis. My enthusiasm for this way of dealing with appropriate prisoners has to be tempered with my capacity to convince my colleagues, in particular, the Minister for Finance, that there are financial benefits and savings to the State in providing this service while improving the criminal justice system and providing for less overcrowding on a temporary basis within our prisons.

Sexual Offences 37. Deputy Jonathan O’Brien asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will provide the exact number of sexual assault cases which may have been endangered by an unregistered nurse working in the sexual assault treatment unit in Letterkenny Hospital, County Donegal; the number of cases the Gardaí or Director of Public Prosecutions are currently reviewing; the date on which this review will conclude; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12047/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I share the concern of Members for the plight of victims who have found themselves caught up in the unfortunate situation referred to in the Deputy’s question. I am informed that a person practising as a nurse in the sexual assault treatment unit of Letter- kenny General Hospital was removed from the register of An Bord Altranais, the Nursing Board, for non-payment of fees, for an 18-month period from 2009. During this period, the person dealt with 25 victims of alleged sexual abuse. An Garda Síochána and the HSE have contacted the persons affected to inform them of the situation. Both organisations are extremely conscious of the distress this will cause to these persons. I understand that the HSE has put supports and services, including counselling, in place to assist them. I also understand that an investigation into the matter has been commenced by the serious incident team of the HSE and two independent experts have been appointed. The review will seek to establish the circumstances leading up to, and the reasons a staff member could continue to practice without being actively registered. It will also examine in detail issues relating to professional practice in the sexual assault treatment unit and will make recommendations on measures that need to be put in place to prevent a recurrence of this situation. I am informed by An Garda Síochána that it is liaising closely with the HSE in its investigation. I am also informed that An Garda Síochána is liaising with the Office of the Director of Public Pros- ecutions in respect of the implications, if any, for ongoing and completed investigations into alleged sexual offences undertaken by the force. I have been in contact with the Garda Commissioner personally about this matter, and, while, of its nature, it is not possible to give a precise timetable, I am confident that examination of the implications for the investigations will be completed as quickly as possible.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: When does the Minister expect to receive the report and its recommendations? If new legislation is required, depending on the outcome of the report, will he give a commitment that it will be brought before the House as soon as possible? 666 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

Deputy Alan Shatter: The problem in this area is not a matter of legislation but a matter of procedure with the failure of a nurse to register and the failure of the HSE to have in place a system of checks and balances to ensure the nurse appointed in this instance was registered and dealing with matters relating to her continuing nursing in an appropriate manner. I cannot give a definitive timescale for the report but as soon as it is received, any issues arising out of it will be addressed. That this difficulty has arisen does not of necessity mean that appropriate prosecutions may be prevented from proceeding. I want to be very careful in what I say not to prejudice the success of a prosecution arising out of an alleged sexual assault.

Other Questions

————

Proposed Legislation 38. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if there is a system of redress for those who engage legal professionals whereby they feel they have been over- charged for services rendered; if so, the system concerned; the role he plays in respect of this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11721/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: While there is undoubtedly a case for consolidating the law on sexual offences for greater accessibility, my immediate priority is to implement a commitment in the Government’s legislative programme to bring forward legislation to enhance the protection of children and other vulnerable persons from sexual exploitation and abuse. My Department has been conducting a wide-ranging examination of the law on sexual offences. This takes account of the recommendations of two Oireachtas committees and the requirements of a number of international legal instruments. An evaluation of the Sex Offenders Act 2001, including public consultation on the management of convicted sex offenders, and a review of the law on incest formed an integral part of this work. The review is close to completion and I expect to bring legislative proposals to Government in the coming months. When this priority work is more advanced, consideration can then be given to consolidating sexual offences legislation, an objective which I believe is very desirable to achieve.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: We spoke previously in this House about our inability to compel judges to go on training courses. Will we provide training courses on sexual violence and abuse? Has the Minister given any consideration to establishing a corps of specially trained prosecutors to deal with sexual violence and abuse cases?

Deputy Alan Shatter: As the Deputy knows, the Judiciary is independent. Neither this House nor the Government can compel members of the Judiciary to undergo any specific or particular training. The Judiciary has established its own body to deal with specific issues and to inform itself and keep up to date on areas in which it is engaged. It is open to the Judiciary to do so in the context of this area. Was there a second part to the Deputy’s question?

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: It was about whether there is a plan to have specially trained prosecutors.

Deputy Alan Shatter: At present there are no plans to do so. A considerable number of persons are instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions to prosecute offences. The DPP 667 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] is rightly independent in the function he performs in selecting those to process prosecutions. I would expect that the DPP in doing so does pay regard to the expertise of those who are asked to process prosecutions on his behalf.

Northern Ireland Issues 39. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will consider developing a comprehensive evidence-based all-Ireland crime prevention strategy under the auspices of the All-Ireland Ministerial Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11873/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: If I can take the second part of the question first, the North-South Ministerial Council to which I assume the Deputy is referring, was as the Deputy will recall, established under the Good Friday Agreement to implement policy and take forward co-operation on an all-Ireland basis to the mutual benefit of all those who reside here. It is a body to which the Government attaches great importance and one we will continue to support and participate in to the fullest extent. The North-South Ministerial Council does not at this time have a justice sector. We hope that this is something that will be introduced in the fullness of time. At present co-operation on policing and justice matters is taken forward under the auspices of bilateral agreements and memoranda of understanding and on an informal basis. Since my appointment as Minister with responsibility for such matters I have been very impressed by the level of co-operation in these areas and by the good relationships which exist between the police forces and the other criminal justice agencies, North and South. I take this opportunity to congratulate David Ford, MLA, on his re-election as Northern Ireland Minister of Justice on Monday. At a very early stage following my appointment I met with David Ford, MLA, and I found that he is someone who is committed to ensuring that we have a co-ordinated approach to addressing issues of mutual concern to all of us on this island in the justice area. I look forward to building on the good work already taking place and to which he has already made such a contribution. Turning to the question of a crime prevention strategy, since 2009 my Department has been engaged in a major consultative exercise leading to the production of a White Paper on crime. The White Paper will set out a policy framework for future strategies to combat and prevent crime. The development of the White Paper involves an end to end examination of the prevention, intervention and enforcement strategies to combat crime. The intention is that this process would lead ultimately to a national anti-crime strategy. As part of this process, officials in my Department have briefed their counterparts in Northern Ireland on numerous occasions. The regular meetings held under the aegis of the intergovernmental agreement on co-operation on criminal justice matters have facilitated these exchanges of views and I intend to meet again with Minister Ford in early June in this regard. The policy areas on which co-operation is taken forward under the agreement include probation and public protection, youth justice and the management of registered sex offenders. It is anticipated that our national anti-crime strategy will reflect the substantial degree of cross-Border co-operation which already exists between the criminal justice agencies North and South, much of which of course would be concerned with crime prevention.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: I welcome the Minister’s comments. I invite him to raise the matter of the development and funding of a comprehensive evidence-based all-Ireland crime prevention strategy with the Minister of Justice in Northern Ireland, Mr. Ford, MLA, when they meet in June. Is the Department open to such a development and will the Minister pursue the matter? 668 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I have no difficulty with what the Deputy suggests.

Garda Transport 40. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he intends to include a gender quota in respect of the appointment of chairpersons of State boards; if so, the quota that will be set; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11691/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I understand from the Garda authorities that, between 2009 and to date in 2011, 294 Garda cars were withdrawn from use and that in the same period 172 new cars were purchased. Of these, 165 were purchased in 2010 and seven so far this year. Garda vehicle purchases are managed centrally and I understand that a divisional breakdown of these figures is not readily available. Clearly budgetary constraints will be a factor in the ongoing rate of car purchases but this should be seen against the background of a major renewal of the fleet in 2007 and 2008, when more than 1,300 vehicles were purchased, to the delight of Deputy Calleary.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: That is the first time someone on the Government benches has praised someone on the Opposition benches.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch: No it is not.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I could not resist his smile.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: As the Minister indicated, in the period 2009 to 2011, the number of Garda cars has reduced by 122. The Minister made a commitment previously that he would protect front line policing services. The use of Garda cars is an important factor in front-line policing. Will the Minister try to address the issue in terms of his budget for next year? I accept he does not know what the budget will be but could he give a commitment to try to restore the figures to at least what was available under the Fianna Fáil Government in 2008?

Deputy Alan Shatter: What the Deputy is missing is that new cars were purchased at a time when there would have been a substantial number of cars that were at the end of their life. One does not get rid of the ones that are no longer reliable to use until one has the new cars in place. The figures do not in fact result in the Garda being in a worse position today than it would have been previously. The Deputy should be aware that many demands are made on Garda vehicles. There is nothing new in the withdrawal of Garda cars from service. It is an ongoing process which has always operated within the Garda fleet. We are concerned with the removal of vehicles that had reached the end of their user life. For the safety of Garda members and the public, it is essential that cars used by the Garda are fully fit for purpose. The Garda authorities have informed me that they have made arrangements to have special safety intervention servicing carried out to vehicles with more than 160,000 km on the clock. On that basis the manufacturers have confirmed that their vehicles are suitable for use from a safety point of view to up to 300,000 km. Apart from catering for safety requirements, the measure has significantly extended the operational life of a Garda car. At this stage the Garda is a good deal better off with regard to the number of cars available to it than would have been the case some years ago.

Deputy Dara Calleary: Have the Garda authorities made arrangements to dispose of the cars formerly used for the ministerial fleet? I presume the Minister is not holding his breath on making much money out of that. Have they been disposed of or what is envisaged in that regard, bar the Minister’s car of course? 669 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I anticipated that someone would not miss the opportunity to ask that question. As I said on previous occasions in reply to questions, that is an operational matter for the Garda Commissioner. In so far as there is any useful purpose to retain some of those cars I expect he will retain them. He previously said that those not required will be sold. It was only approximately two weeks ago that Ministers had to make their own arrangements to start using their own cars with civilian drivers. In the past ten or 14 days, the Garda Commissioner has had some other issues on his mind, such as the visit currently taking place and the visit of President Obama which we look forward to on Monday. I expect when those matters have been dealt with and the visits are completed, he will direct his mind as to how to best deal with the cars now being made redundant.

Residency Permits 41. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of persons that have applied for residency since the Zambrano judgment was handed down; the number of persons whose applications are outstanding; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11868/11]

66. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of staff within his Department allocated to process fresh residency applications under the terms of the Zambrano judgment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11869/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I propose to take Questions Nos. 41 and 66 together. Currently my Department’s records show that 929 persons who have no current right of residency have applied to have their case to remain in the State examined in accordance with the principles set out in the Zambrano judgment. All these cases require careful consideration in advance of any decision on whether they are comprehended by this judgment. To date, decisions have been made in 102 cases, with permission to remain in the State having been granted in all such cases. The majority of the remaining applications are cases where all the required documentation and information has not yet been submitted and where this is the case, the persons involved have been advised in writing as to what further documentation or information they must submit. A number of other third country nationals who already hold a right of residency, for example on the basis of stamp 2, student, or stamp 3, dependant, conditions, have also sought to fall within the terms of the Zambrano judgment on the basis of being a parent of an Irish citizen child. Persons in this category are being advised to attend at their local Garda registration office, with certain items of documentation such as birth certificates, proof of residency and so on, at which point, all other things being equal, their immigration status will be upgraded to stamp 4 which will allow their continued residence in the State. These cases will not require substantive processing in my Department and, as such, they are not being recorded in a manner that will enable me to state how many such cases are involved. There is a further cohort of cases involving persons who have sought to have their cases considered in accordance with the principles set out in the Zambrano judgment but who, on the face of it, will not meet the Zambrano criteria because, for example, they have left the State of their own accord or because they are EU rather than third country nationals. The Zambrano judgment has no relevance to EU nationals, who are entitled to be here in any case. Nevertheless, each such case will have to be responded to in an appropriate manner and will require the deployment of resources to process them. My Department’s records also indicate that there is a further body of some 140 cases where a link to the Zambrano judgment has been identified, but these cases are the subject of judicial 670 Other 18 May 2011. Questions. review proceedings in the High Court where a decision to make a deportation order has been challenged. As such legal proceedings are ongoing, it would not be appropriate for me to make any further comment on such cases at this time. However, subject to issues such as the general terms of settlement including costs being addressed in a satisfactory manner, I do not anticipate any major delays in completing these cases. In terms of the staffing resources deployed to processing Zambrano type cases, at present nine staff members are engaged on this work on a full-time basis while a similar number are involved in providing essential administrative support work to that team on a less than full- time basis. The judgment in the Zambrano case was delivered on 8 March 2011 and I am satisfied that since that date, the relevant officials in my Department have applied themselves diligently to having all necessary follow up work carried out, including obtaining legal advice as to the implications of the judgment, to ensure that any person to whom the Zambrano judgment applies will have their case examined and a decision notified with the minimum delay. When I took office as Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence on 9 March, I took a significant leadership role in the whole matter. On 21 March, shortly after the judgment was delivered, I issued a detailed press statement, with the Government’s agreement, setting out my views as to how the judgment should be applied in Ireland.

Garda Operations 42. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will give an assurance that the Garda Síochána have adequate resources to provide security for US Pres- ident Barack Obama’s visit. [11723/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: The Garda Síochána, along with the Defence Forces, is responsible for the security of the visit of President Obama and I have the utmost confidence in the Garda Commissioner and his officers, who I know are totally committed to ensuring that these events pass off without incident. I am fully satisfied that the commissioner has available to him all the necessary and appropriate resources to ensure the safety and security of President Obama during his forthcoming visit to this jurisdiction and that the Defence Forces are providing all the appropriate support in aid of the civil power. A whole range of security considerations must be taken into account and those considerations are based on an ongoing assessment of the risks involved. I am sure people generally will be understanding of the security arrangements which have to be made and will co-operate fully with them. Such arrangements are a necessary feature of visits of this kind to any country and I am sure they will not detract from the great welcome Irish people will give to President Obama. Some people would seek to disrupt these visits. The right to protest is an important one and one that my Government will always uphold, but we will not tolerate those who seek to break the law.

Deputy Dara Calleary: I endorse the Minister’s remarks, compliment the Garda and the Defence Forces on the operation to date and wish them well for the continuation of the operation around the Queen’s visit and for next week. I compliment in particular those gardaí who were subject to attack yesterday in the city centre. When the Garda Commissioner addressed the GRA conference, he said it would be “unreasonable” to expect the force to pay from its existing budget for the scale of the operation we are witnessing. I take it, therefore, that it will be necessary to introduce a new Estimate for the Garda and the Defence Forces to pay for the scale of the operation. Does the Minister plan to 671 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

[Deputy Dara Calleary.] introduce such an Estimate or will he take the funding from existing resources within the Department?

Deputy Alan Shatter: I thank the Deputy for his comments on the work undertaken by the Garda for this week’s visit. Substantial work of a security nature has been undertaken, with the assistance and contribution of the Defence Forces. The conduct of a small minority of individuals, in making threats against the State and a distinguished visitor and her husband, is regrettable. It is also regrettable that a multiplicity of hoax bomb warnings have been issued and that the finding of some dangerous devices has required the nature of the security operation that has been undertaken. It is regrettable that this has curtailed the capacity of the many thousands of people in Dublin, who would have liked to have seen matters a good deal closer and to have been present at some of the events involving the Queen and Prince Philip, so that they have had to follow those events on their television screens, all because a small group of people created difficulties on our streets and posed a serious threat. It is unfortunate in a democracy that on occasions we should be subject to the tyranny of a minority. In the context of funding, the Government gave every assurance to the Garda Commissioner and my Department that any funding necessary to ensure that all necessary security steps would be taken during the course of the visit would be provided. When both visits are complete, we will assess the costs incurred and these will be factored financially into how matters develop in the coming year. These visits will not impact on the capacity of the Garda to properly conduct its duties during the rest of this year.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I find it extraordinary that a Government that prides itself on fiscal rectitude and the need for it does not have an estimate for the security and associated costs for the visits of the Queen and President Obama. Should we take it from the Minister’s response that the Government has essentially given a blank cheque to the Garda and any other organs of the State involved in facilitating this visit suggesting they can have as much as they want and we will count the cost afterwards? At the same time vulnerable and impoverished sections of our society are pleading for some respite from austerity and cuts but are told again and again there is no money. I welcome the Minister’s comments about allowing and facilitating peaceful protests. In that regard I am somewhat bemused by the decision of Dublin City Council to ban posters advertising a planned demonstration by the Irish Anti-War Movement scheduled for this Sunday. The Irish Anti-War Movement will be holding a completely peaceful protest — as was the one we held last night — against US foreign policy on Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain where the US is financing regimes that are busy crushing democratic movements. Can the Minister use his offices to intervene with Dublin City Council and ask it that we be allowed to put up our posters advertising our peaceful anti-war demonstration and that that demonstration be allowed to proceed unhindered?

Deputy Joe Higgins: Deputy Catherine Murphy reminded me that a citizen has inquired and is concerned that the Queen may return to England thinking that our national colour is yellow since all she has seen on the streets of Dublin are thousands of individuals with high-visibility jackets.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I suppose Deputy Higgins really cannot contain himself in trying to think of some smart comment to make. I always find Deputy Boyd Barrett’s contributions interesting, and his and his Irish Anti- War Movement’s anti-American obsession quite extraordinary. Perhaps the Irish Anti-War 672 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

Movement might consider demonstrating against the Syrian Government killing its own people, now estimated at in excess of 1,000.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: Last Saturday I was demonstrating against the Syrian Government.

Deputy Alan Shatter: They might demonstrate against Colonel Gadaffi bombing his own towns.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I have done that too.

Deputy Alan Shatter: They might also demonstrate, perhaps peacefully, on this island against those who caused the sort of mayhem and thuggery we witnessed on Dorset Street last night——

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: Absolutely; the Minister is dead right.

Deputy Alan Shatter: ——when gardaí were targeted by violent thugs——

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: Can the Minister answer the question I asked him?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister is in possession.

Deputy Alan Shatter: ——in circumstances in which there was an alleged protest. I find this approach by the Deputy amazing in the context of what he said. Of course it would be preferable if the resources that have been utilised to provide the level of security necessary because of the conduct of the types of individuals we saw on Dorset Street last night was not necessary.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: We all oppose that. Can the Minister answer the question?

Deputy Alan Shatter: It would be preferable if people accepted the democratic will of the people and allowed, as is the case in most civilised democracies, leaders of foreign countries to visit this State without them being under threat, without bomb hoaxes and without viable devices being placed.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: We all agree with that.

Deputy Alan Shatter: It would be very productive if the Deputy protested against people who engage in that type of conduct, but, of course, that would not have crossed his mind.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I abhor that kind of conduct. The Minister has not answered the question.

Deputy Dara Calleary: There has been inferred criticism of the scale of the security operation. A bus left my town, Ballina, on Monday evening and somewhere between Ballina and Dublin a viable device was found on that bus containing completely innocent people who were going about their business. It is unfortunate that we need this scale of security operation. However, there are criminals — so-called republicans — purporting to act in the name of this country who do not care whom they maim. It is necessary to have that level of security and this party fully supports it.

Proposed Legislation 43. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Minister for Justice and Equality when the proposed referendum in relation to judge’s pay will be held. [10394/11] 673 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

71. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the timeframe for a referendum on judges’ pay. [11725/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I propose to take Questions Nos. 43 and 71 together. The Government is committed, in line with our undertaking during the recent general election campaign, to bringing forward a constitutional referendum to allow for reductions in pay for members of the Judiciary in circumstances where it has been necessary for the State to engage in financial emergency measures in the public interest. While it is generally well known that the public service pension levy has not been imposed on members of the Judiciary it has been less generally recognised that there have also been two pay cuts across the public sector, neither of which has been applied to judicial salaries. This has led to considerable disparities between judicial pay and that of other senior officeholders in the State with whom they would have been linked for pay determination purposes in the past. In all fairness, it should be noted that a majority of the Judiciary has voluntarily contributed sums equivalent to the pension levy. It is vital, however, for the independence of the Judiciary that it is not perceived as a group of officeholders who are uniquely insulated from the economic crisis which is detrimentally affecting the lives of all our people. The date for holding the referendum remains a matter for decision by the Government pending full consideration in consultation with the Attorney General of the details of the necessary legislation. As the Deputy will be aware this is an issue I previously addressed when in Opposition by publishing a Private Members’ Bill. The detail of the legislation required is being considered further by the Office of the Attorney General and a referendum will be held as early as possible.

Deputy Joe Higgins: Does the Minister agree that it is repugnant that a very privileged elite in our society — which senior judges in particular are given that some of them might be on six or seven times the average industrial wage — should be allowed to continue with such very high salaries while working people, poor people and unemployed people are getting hammered by the Government continuing the policy of Fianna Fáil and making them pay for the EU-IMF bailout and the financial crimes of European bankers? I ask the Minister to be more specific on the timing. He indicated he already has a Bill drafted. As I believe he will agree that it is a very straightforward question, there really should not be any problem in putting a time on it. Will it take place this year? Surely it is the Minister for Justice and Equality who will bring the recommendation to the Government. Did the Minister receive a report on the meeting between the Chief Justice and the Taoiseach in regard to related matters of judges’ pensions and so forth? What was asked and were any assurances or promises given by the Taoiseach with regard to the issues that were under discussion?

Deputy Alan Shatter: I believe the Taoiseach answered that question in this House. I do not believe any assurances were given in the context of that issue. As the Deputy will be aware an interview with an unnamed judge was reported in The Irish Times, expressing some concerns with regard to how changes in the Finance Act might affect retiring members of the Judiciary. I have a simple view in this area, which is that there should be no special treatment for any particular group of people and the law should apply equally to everyone. If it gives rise to anomalies that could impact unfairly on individuals or if there are unintended consequences of legislation enacted in this House, those are issues that should be addressed. At this time I cannot provide any further information on that issue beyond saying that there is no change in the law as it stands at the moment. 674 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

On the timing of the referendum, as the Deputy will be aware the Government has proposals for a series of referendums to be held and we are considering the practicalities of the extent, if any, to which a referendum may coincide with the presidential election. It is of very great importance in the context of the workings of this House that we have a referendum to address issues arising from the Abbeylara judgment to facilitate committees of these Houses being able to engage in full and proper inquiries. There are issues with regard to a referendum in the context of Members of these Houses being in receipt of information from constituents or other people on matters of public importance and not finding themselves before the courts having to reveal the identity of those who might have furnished them with information that is correct and real. There is a range of areas, including the work being done preparing for a children’s rights referendum. Decisions need to be made on dates when referendums will be held. A substantial amount of work is being done on these issues in the Office of the Attorney General. It is not just a question of publishing a Bill as I did as the Deputy correctly mentioned. 4o’clock There is the need to publish the ancillary legislation through the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, which is part and parcel of the process, and putting in place an appropriate referendum commission. These are all issues to the forefront of the Government’s attention and when decisions are made on dates, they will be announced.

Deputy Joe Higgins: At the time of the Abbeylara tragedy and when the report thereon was issued, during the term of the 29th Dáil, I called for a referendum. Does the Minister agree that some of the proposals made, including that on judges’ pay, are non-controversial and would — I am not being presumptuous about the people’s vote — probably be supported by an extensive majority? Does he also agree that a number of the referenda could be held on same day as the Presidential election? While he is at it, why does he not hold a referendum on the Presidency, either to make the office completely democratic such that it would be open to every citizen to stand which is not the case at present, or to abolish it on the grounds that it is a waste of money?

Deputy Alan Shatter: The importance of the position of President and the benefits to the State of the Presidency are clearly seen in the events of this week. Mrs. McAleese has been a most distinguished President. She and her husband have made an extraordinarily valuable contribution to the peace process. She has done enormous work to the benefit of the State in visits she has made to other countries. The Presidency has been established as an office of genuine value and importance. The key to that office is, of course, the person elected thereto. We have been very fortunate to have had the recent holders of that office. Therefore, I do not share the Deputy’s view thereon. With regard to bringing forward legislation, I agree with the Deputy on the merits of holding a considered referendum on judicial pay that would not interfere with the independence of the Judiciary, which is very important, but which would ensure changes in public pay across the public sector, or changes within what I would describe as grades with pay scales comparable to those of the Judiciary, were applied equally to the Judiciary. A referendum on this issue would receive substantial support from the majority of the people. I hope we will hold that referendum this year, but it is a matter for the Government to determine the date. In the context of the other referenda mentioned by the Deputy, there is substantial work to be done in drafting legislation and teasing out the wording required in certain instances, for example, the referendum required arising from the Abbeylara judgment. We must ensure committees of this House have full and proper capacity to ask questions, obtain answers and publish reports, but we must not create a system in the House that would resemble the Star Chamber 675 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] of many centuries ago. There is a balance to be prescribed in the legislation that must be given careful thought. It is legislation for which the Government has great enthusiasm. The Government has an enormous reforming agenda. Substantial legislation will be produced by my Department and others. An issue arises in ensuring adequate advice is obtained from the Office of the Attorney General and that office has time to consider the detail of what is emerging from each Department.

Magdalene Laundries 44. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the date on which he will bring proposals to the Government outlining a reparations scheme for women who were imprisoned in Magdalene Laundries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11865/11]

Deputy Alan Shatter: I welcome the opportunity to speak to the House on this important issue. As many Members will know, I have long believed the issues raised by, or on behalf of, those women and girls who were resident in the Magdalene laundries must be fully investigated. I have great sympathy for the women concerned and want to help in bringing closure to this issue for the individuals concerned. Senior officials from my Department previously met individuals who were resident in the laundries, with interest groups campaigning on their behalf. Their position is clearly understood and respected. My Department will continue to provide whatever assistance it can for individuals and groups seeking access to records which, it must be said, are, in many cases, poor and incomplete. It must also be said that there were many circumstances that led to women becoming resident in the laundries. Unfortunately, owing to the lapse of time and the lack of available records, there is a real difficulty in establishing the facts of what actually happened and the numbers involved. We know that there were ten Magdalene laundries in this jurisdiction which were privately run by four religious orders and predate the foundation of the State. It seems that the vast majority of females who entered or were placed in Magdalene laundries did so by private arrangements and without the direct involvement of the State. It was perhaps a sign of harsher times by today’s standards, but it appears many of them entered owing to poverty, family or other circumstances. As regards the criminal justice system, all of the available evidence at this stage suggests the number of women who entered such institutions through that system was small and that the periods of remand were for days rather than weeks or months. I am aware of only one such institution — St. Mary Magdalen’s Asylum, Sean McDermott Street, Dublin — which was approved for use in October 1960 as a remand institution for female persons pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act 1960. Like many Members, I read with interest the assessment published by the Human Rights Commission on 9 November 2010 of the request by the Justice for Magdalenes group to carry out an inquiry under section 9 of the Human Rights Commission Act 2000 into the treatment of women and girls who resided in Magdalene laundries. It recommended that a statutory mechanism be established to investigate the matters advanced by Justice for Magdalenes and, in appropriate cases, to grant redress where warranted. The Human Rights Commission did not carry out the inquiry it was requested to carry out by the group. The assessment of the commission was the subject of an Adjournment debate in this House on the same evening. As outlined to the House in that debate, the assessment raises issues for a range of Departments, as well as for the four religious congregations which operated the Magdalene institutions. My Department, in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, the role of which is to provide legal advice, has prepared a draft submission for the Government on the matter 676 Other 18 May 2011. Questions. which I am considering and which I anticipate bringing before the Government shortly. As I said in recent replies to previous questions, a comprehensive examination of the facts is required. With that in mind, I intend to advance proposals.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: I welcome the Minister’s statement on the preparation of the draft submission he plans to bring before the Government. Has he any timeline in mind?

Deputy Alan Shatter: I expect to bring the matter before the Government by the end of the first week in June at the very latest, if not this month. I expect to be in a position to make certain announcements after my colleagues in government have had an opportunity to consider the matter. I hope matters will be advanced in a positive and helpful way as a consequence of the proposals that will be brought forward.

Global Intelligence Forum 45. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will provide details of attendance of the Secretary General of his Department at the forthcoming Global Intelligence Forum in Dungarvan, County Waterford in July; the nature of this conference; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11886/11]

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Question No. 45 is in the name of Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I call an tAire. Gabh mo leithscéal.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: My apologies.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I would not want to deprive the Deputy of the opportunity to ask a supplementary question before he receives his first answer. If he would like to go ahead, I am quite happy to sit down and relax for a couple of moments. We seem to be going at a rate of knots at this stage.

Deputy Joe Higgins: The question is whether the Deputy will be wiser after hearing the Minister’s response on the forum.

Deputy Alan Shatter: He will.

Deputy Joe Higgins: Unlikely.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I know the Deputy is anticipating yet another conspiracy advanced by the US Government. I am anticipating the protest about capitalist imperialism and the possibility of demonstrations being held in Waterford. If the Deputy listens to the answer, perhaps he will be somewhat enlightened.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I am all ears.

Deputy Alan Shatter: I am advised that my Department has accepted an invitation to be represented at the second annual Global Intelligence Forum. Intelligence, of course, is very important.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: It is in short supply.

Deputy Alan Shatter: It is, indeed. 677 Other 18 May 2011. Questions.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Order, please.

Deputy Alan Shatter: A well known legal phrase is, Res ipsa loquitur. The Global Intelligence Forum is due to take place in Dungarvan from 11 to 13 July. I understand the forum which is organised by Mercyhurst College, in partnership with the Waterford local authorities — the Waterford local authorities have not yet been taken over by the CIA — is one of a number of outreach initiatives on which the college has embarked to capture best practices in the intelligence community. The annual forum focuses on key intelligence issues from a global perspective and will include speakers and participants from a number of countries in the areas of business, national security, history, law enforcement and government. I am satisfied that in the circumstances it is entirely appropriate for my Department to participate in the forum.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I hope the Minister in his responses will not resort to utterly false claims of anti-Americanism. For the record, and in response to the claims the Minister has made today, I am very pro-American and its history, culture and people, but I reserve the right to be critical of the American Government’s foreign policy and other matters.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Could the Deputy ask a question now?

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: I am just stating that for the record, given the earlier unjusti- fied comment. What is the reason senior figures both in the Garda and from the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Defence are attending this conference with former directors of the CIA, former directors of military intelligence in the United States army and former senior figures from the FBI? Bizarrely, the intelligence conference is also being attended by the director of Treasury Holdings, one of the developers that helped bankrupt this country, and Mr. Frank Daly, the chairman of the National Asset Management Agency. Is it appropriate for high level officials from various Departments to attend such a spooks conference with spooks from the CIA, FBI and so forth, as well as developers who have played such a malign role in our economic fortunes? Is it in line with this country’s tradition of military neutrality to be involved in such a conference?

Deputy Alan Shatter: I would not wish to unduly upset the Deputy but it might not be a surprise to him to hear that “Spooks” is my favourite television programme. It is a great pity it is not on television at present. It should also not surprise the Deputy that there is substantial co-operation between us and the United States in dealing with organised crime and international terrorism. There is also substantial co-operation between us and our European Union partners and the British Government in addressing these issues. It is of great value and importance to this country that in counteracting a broad range of activities by organised criminals, be it drug importation or human trafficking, there is capacity to exchange intelligence, interact with each other and to learn best practice from each other. Intelligence is a key aspect in all aspects of policing and national security, from day-to-day operational policing to the sophistication and complexity of investigations into organised crime. Good intelligence gathering and co-operation between democratic countries in acquiring intelligence are crucial in the engagement of a police force. It is important that my Department is fully informed of the best practices to apply in dealing with matters in the justice area. My Department, which has a primary strategic role in supporting the Garda Síochána in tackling crime and promoting a peaceful society, has a very substantial interest in participating in this 678 Adjournment 18 May 2011. Debate Matters conference and in consideration of issues related to intelligence gathering and analysis in the broadest sense, both from a practical and academic perspective. The Secretary General of the Department received and accepted an invitation to speak at the conference, which is focused on best practices in the intelligence community. I presume the Deputy would not wish this country to operate as a solitary island in a vacuum and never engage with other countries in dealing with international crime and terrorism and issues in which we have an interest as a democratic society to protect both the State and the citizens of the State from those engaged in criminality.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: Of course some of the issues the Minister mentioned are legitimate matters on which we must co-operate with other countries. However, there is a little more than that to the CIA. Does it not concern the Minister that the CIA is involved in illegal kidnapping, so-called renditions and has been involved in all sorts of manipulations in places such as the Middle East? It might well be involved in the activities of the Saudi regime, with which the US Government is so closely associated, in trying to crush a democratic movement in Bahrain. Are these the intelligence services we should mix with given that history? Why is there a requirement on delegates attending this conference not to write about their attendance or what takes place at the conference? There are to be no blogs about it and journalists are not allowed to attend. None of the content of the conference is allowed to emerge from it. Can the Minister explain why that is the case?

Deputy Alan Shatter: The Deputy is yet again revealing his eccentric and odd views of this world. He is overwhelmed personally with conspiracy theories and, despite denying it, an anti- US bias. He apparently loves the American people but does not want us to engage with or talk to them, which is an odd way of viewing the world. This is the second year that Mercyhurst College, which is based in Pennsylvania, has organised an academic outreach event in Dungarvan. It is a great benefit to Dungarvan that such events are organised. The event is organised in partnership with the Waterford local authorities. There is nothing covert or underhand about it. Indeed, if the Deputy wishes to find more information about it, he should look at the Mercyhurst College website at www.mercyhurst.edu.

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 Tom Barry — the need to introduce regulation in respect of food labelling; (2) Deputy Jim Daly — the eligibility criteria for applicants for the position of supervisors in the new Tús programme; (3) Deputy Joe Carey — the need for any boundary extension of Limerick city to exclude any part of County Clare; (4) Deputy Gerald Nash — the need to continue to support, resource and recognise the contribution of the arts to society and the economy; (5) Deputy Dessie Ellis — the need to address the current problems in the taxi industry; (6) Deputy Dara Calleary — the need to clarify the position in relation to RAPID projects including those in Ballina, County Mayo; (7) Deputy Robert Troy — the need to provide additional funding in respect of Multyfarnham and Milltownpass community centres, County Westmeath; (8) Deputy Billy Kelleher — the funding of the Health Service Executive in respect of the nursing homes support scheme for 2011; (9) Deputy Mattie McGrath — the future plans for St. Michael’s acute psychiatric unit at Clonmel hospital, County Tipperary; (10) Deputy Seamus Healy — the need to commence the bypass of Tipperary town on the N24; (11) Deputy Peter Fitzpatrick — the problem of fuel laundering in the Border counties; 679 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle.] and (12) Deputy Martin Ferris — the need to support the proposed Shannon L.N.G project in Tarbert, County Kerry. The matters raised by Deputies Joe Carey, Dara Calleary and Seamus Healy have been selected for discussion.

Criminal Justice Bill 2011: Order for Second Stage

Bill entitled an Act to amend criminal law and procedure relating to the investigation and prosecution of certain offences and, for that purpose, to amend the Criminal Justice Act 1984 to provide for the suspension in certain circumstances of the detention of persons detained by the Garda Síochána under that Act in connection with the investigation of such offences; to provide a power for judges of the District Court to order persons in certain circumstances to produce documents or provide information or both for the purposes of the investigation of such offences; to amend the Criminal Justice Act 1984 to make further and better provision for persons detained by the Garda Síochána under that Act between the hours of midnight and 8 a.m.; to amend that Act and certain other enactments to make further and better provision for consultation with a solicitor by persons detained by the Garda Síochána under that Act and those enactments in connection with the investigation of offences; to provide for offences relating to the concealment of facts disclosed by documents and the withholding of information in certain circumstances; and to provide for related matters. Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I move: “That Second Stage be taken now.”

Question put and agreed to.

Criminal Justice Bill 2011: Second Stage Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I move: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” The programme for Government is unambiguous in its commitment to the principle that the white collar criminal must be made amenable for his or her crime. As Minster for Justice and Equality, my top priority is to restore the faith of the Irish people that this principle will be as vigorously applied to white collar crime as it is to all other crime. Justice delayed is justice denied. This Bill is an important step in delivering on the Government’s strong commitment to tackle white collar crime. It was our intention to publish this Bill within the first 100 days of Govern- ment. We achieved that aim when the Bill was published last Friday. Our next step in delivering on our commitment is to have this Bill enacted and on the Statute Book as a matter of priority. I hope the Opposition Deputies will co-operate to facilitate its enactment before the summer recess. In this respect, I am grateful for the co-operation I have been afforded here in allowing me to bring this Bill before the House today. A fundamental principle of criminal justice is that the person who commits a crime should be brought before the courts and made accountable. The faith of the Irish people in that principle as applied to financial wrongdoing has been severely tested in recent times. There is widespread concern that the investigation and prosecution of white collar crime in this country is taking too long. There is no doubt that the complexities of financial crime create a high challenge for investigators and for prosecutors. However, we must find ways to ensure that no matter how complex the crime, no matter how important, wealthy or influential the wrongdoer 680 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage may be, he or she must be brought before the courts. I have one simple and straight forward message. There will be no impunity for those who engage in white collar crime. The main purpose of the Criminal Justice Bill 2011 is to address delays in the prosecution and investigation of complex crime by improving certain important procedural matters and strengthening Garda investigative powers. The proposals in the Bill are based on the experiences of those involved in investigations and prosecutions of white collar crime, and in particular on the experiences of those involved in current investigations into bank fraud and financial irregularities. My intention is to ensure that the new procedures and powers set out in the Bill will speed up future investigations and prosecutions. However, it is also my intention that the provisions of the Bill will be available to investigators to speed up major investigations currently underway. The Bill is being targeted at specified serious and complex offences attracting a penalty of at least five years imprisonment, including offences in the areas of banking and finance, company law, money laundering, fraud, corruption, competition, consumer protection and cyb- ercrime. Before I turn to the details of the Bill’s provisions I would like to briefly outline its main proposals. The Bill provides for a new system to make more effective use of detention periods. This will allow persons arrested and detained for questioning by the Garda Síochána to be released and their detention suspended so that further investigations can be conducted during the suspension period. A central provision of the Bill is the new power for the Garda Síochána to apply to court for an order to require any person with relevant information to produce documents, answer questions and provide information for the purposes of the investigation of relevant offences. Failure to comply with such an order will be an offence. Also provided for are measures relating to how documents are to be produced to the Garda. These measures are aimed at reducing the delays associated with the production of large volumes of poorly ordered and uncategorised documents to the Garda in the course of its investigations. The Bill also contains measures to prevent unnecessary delays in investigations arising from claims of legal privilege. In addition, it provides for presumptions in respect of documents which will streamline the admission of evidence. It also provides for the creation of a number of new offences, including an offence similar to the former misprision of felony offence, which relates to the failure to report information to the Garda. This particular offence is of major importance, as its creation in the Bill will ensure that those who become aware of persons engaging in white collar crime are under an obligation to bring what they know to the attention of the Garda Síochána. I am also taking the opportunity presented by the Bill to clarify two issues relating to the investigation of crime more generally. The issues relate to the right of suspects in Garda custody to access legal advice prior to questioning and the circumstances in which questioning may be conducted between midnight and 8 a.m. I now turn to the detail of the main provisions of the Bill. The Bill is being targeted at certain complex white collar crime. Section 3 provides for the scope of the Bill. Its provisions, other than the provisions relating to the investigation of crime generally, will apply to offences referred to as “relevant offences”.A“relevant offence” means an arrestable offence specified in the Schedule, or as the Minister may specify by order. An arrestable offence is an offence punishable by imprisonment for five years or more. The offences in the Schedule include theft, fraud and corruption offences, as well as company law, banking and other financial offences. The offences which may be specified by order of the Minister are offences relating to banking, investment of funds and other financial activities, company law, money laundering and financing terrorism, theft and fraud, bribery and corruption, competition and consumer protection, 681 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] crime relating to electronic communications networks and information systems and the raising and collection of taxes and duties. The Minister must consider that the powers under the Bill are, by reason of the nature of the arrestable offence concerned and the prolonged period of time that may be required for the investigation of such offences as a result of the complexity of such investigations, necessary for the investigation of that offence. The Minister must consult with any other relevant Minister before making such an order. The proposals in Part 2 include a new system to make more effective use of detention periods. The complexity of recent investigations and the volumes of documents involved have shown that it is not always possible to complete questioning and check facts in one period of detention. The suspension of detention provisions, provided for in section7, are being applied to the 24 hour maximum detention period permitted under section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984. The amendments will allow the period of detention under section 4 of the 1984 Act to be suspended and the person released during the period of suspension. The purpose of these provisions is to allow the Garda to follow up on information obtained during questioning and conduct further investigations during the suspension period. Section 7(a) inserts six new subsections into section 4 of the 1984 Act. The new subsection (3A) allows the Garda to suspend the detention of a person being detained in respect of a relevant offence, where there are reasonable grounds for believing that it is necessary for the purpose of permitting enquiries or investigations to be made for the further and proper investigation of that offence. Subsection (3B) provides that a person’s detention may be suspended on no more than two occasions. The total time for which a person’s detention may be suspended must not exceed four months from the date of the first suspension. The person must return to the Garda station at the date and time specified in the notice given to him or her under subsection (3C) or at such other date and time or Garda station, as may be notified under Subsection (3D). Subsection (3C) provides that the person concerned must be given notice in writing that his or her detention is being suspended, of the Garda station and of the date and time on which he or she must return for the continuation of the detention, and of the consequences of failing to return. The effect of the notice must be explained to the person orally by a Garda. Subsection (3D) provides for the issuing by a Garda inspector of a notice changing the return date and time or Garda station to which the person must return. Subsection (3E) provides for the continuation of a person’s detention on his or her return to the Garda station. It also provides for the person’s release where the member in charge of the Garda station concerned no longer has, at the time of the person’s return, reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s continued detention is necessary. Subsection (3F) clari- fies how suspension of detention will operate in cases where the person is detained for another offence or the detention is continued of subsection (5 A) of section 4 of the 1984 Act in respect of another offence. Section 8 follows up on the provisions of section 7 and mainly deals with the consequences for a person who fails to return to a Garda station after the period of suspension has expired. Section 8 inserts new sections 4A, 4B and 4C into the Criminal Justice Act 1984. Section 4A provides that a person who fails to return to a Garda station for the continuation of a period of detention which was suspended may be arrested without warrant and returned to that station. The period of time commencing on the person’s arrest and ending on his or her arrival to the Garda station concerned will be excluded in reckoning a period of detention permitted under section 4 of the 1984 Act. Section 4B provides for an offence of failing to return to the 682 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

Garda station concerned. Section 4C provides for a regulation-making power for the procedures to apply to the suspension of detention. I now would like to turn to the questioning of persons in Garda custody between midnight and 8 a.m. If I may, I will refer back to paragraph (c) of section 7. The provisions in section 7 which I outlined introduced a new procedure on suspended detention and they are limited to relevant offences. On the other hand, paragraph (c) of section 7 relates to existing detention procedures under section 4 of the 1984 Act and to the investigation of crime more generally. It will apply to all persons detained under section 4 irrespective of the offence concerned. It amends section 4(6) of the 1984 Act in order to clarify the circumstances in which such persons may be questioned between midnight and 8 a.m. As a consequence of this amendment, the norm will be that no questioning will take place between these hours other than where the detained person objects to the suspension of questioning in which case questioning will continue or the member in charge of the station authorises questioning for exceptional reasons relating to the particular circumstances of the case. The circumstances required to justify the giving of such an authorisation are specified and include a reasonable belief on the part of the member that to delay questioning until the following morning would involve a risk of injury to other persons, serious damage to property or interference with evidence. A possible scenario that comes to mind is where a person is detained in connection with a kidnapping that is still in progress and where there is concern for the safety of the victim. Any period that is suspended will be excluded from the calculation of the detention period. This is already the case under the 1984 Act and I am continuing this approach as to do otherwise would greatly reduce the amount of time available to the Garda to question a person detained under section 4. Deputies will recall that the maximum period of detention permitted under that section is 24 hours. I will now address the right of detained person to access legal advice. Section 9 contains further amendments to the 1984 Act which are of general application to persons detained under section 4. The amendments concern the well-established right of a person in Garda custody to access legal advice and are aimed at clarifying the circumstances in which questioning may proceed notwithstanding that the suspect has not yet had an opportunity to consult with a solicitor. It is, of course, generally Garda practice to delay questioning to facilitate such consultations. However, recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights emphasises the importance of detained persons having, as a rule, access to legal advice in advance of questioning. Exceptions are permitted but they must be based on compelling reasons arising from the circumstance of the particular case. In order to ensure that laws are fully compliant with our obligations under the convention and have the degree of certainty required it is necessary to clarify this matter in legislation. Section 9, paragraph (a) inserts two new sections in the Act — sections 5A and 5B. Section 5A contains the general rule that questioning of detained persons is not to proceed pending access to legal advice. Two exceptions are permitted: where the person waives his or her right to consult or where the member in charge authorises questioning. Deputies will note that the test that must be met before such an authorisation can be given is identical to that which will apply to the questioning of persons between midnight and 8 a.m. to which I have already referred. Again, the member must have reasonable grounds for believing that to delay would involve a risk of one of a specified list of circumstances arising. The list includes injury to other persons, serious damage to property, interference with evidence, etc. I am providing for the detention clock to stop subject to a maximum period pending a solicitor making him or herself available for a consultation. This provision is necessary to deal with the difficulties encountered by the Garda in contacting available solicitors, for example, 683 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] in rural districts, or at weekends. I am satisfied that the maximum periods proposed, three hours for the most part but up to six hours in some circumstances between midnight and 8 a.m., strike a reasonable balance between the rights of the detained person and the needs of the investigation of crime. As is already the case, a consultation may be in person or by telephone. In either event, it must take place in private although this may be in the sight of but out of the hearing of the Garda for security reasons. Section 5B provides for ministerial regulations on procedural matters concerning access to solicitors. The proposed regulations will assist the Garda authorities in implementing arrangements to facilitate the right of detained persons to access legal advice. These amendments refer to persons detained under section 4 of the 1984 Act. It is, of course, important that they also apply to persons detained under our other statutory powers, such as section 30 of the Offences against the State Act and section 2 of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act 1996. This is achieved by paragraph (b) of this section and by sections 13 and 14 of this Bill. In conclusion on the matter of access to legal advice, I would draw to the attention of Deputies the amendments in paragraphs (c), (d) and (e) of section 9 and in sections 10, 11 and 12. These amendments concern the various provisions on the Statute Book which allow infer- ences adverse to an accused to be drawn in criminal proceedings from his or her failure or refusal, for example, to answer certain questions asked by the Garda during an investigation. The amendments make it clear that in order for an inference to be drawn in proceedings the accused must have had access to legal advice, other than where he or she waived that right. I now want to turn to provision of documents and information to the Garda. Returning to the issue of white collar crime, experience with recent investigations has shown that investigations can be hampered by the reluctance of some potential witnesses to make statements or otherwise provide information to the Garda Síochána. Part 3 contains new powers to compel witnesses to provide documents and information to the Garda to assist in the investigation and prosecution of complex crimes. Section 15 provides that a garda may apply to the District Court for an order for the making available by a person of particular documents or the provision of particular information, whether by answering specified questions or making a statement setting out the answers to those questions. The District Court judge must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the document or information is relevant to the investigation of the relevant offence concerned, there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that it may constitute evidence of or relating to the commission of that offence and, finally, that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the document or information should be provided, having regard to the likely benefit to the investigation and any other relevant circumstances. Where the judge orders the production of documents, he or she may order the person to identify and categorise them in a particular manner. This provision should help to reduce the delays associated with the disclosure of large volumes of poorly ordered and uncategorised documents to the Garda in the course of its investigations. An order providing for access to documents in a specified place may require a Garda to be allowed to enter the place to obtain access to the documents. Provision is made for access to passwords where the documents concerned are in non-legible form, for example, electronic documents on a computer. It should be noted that the order does not confer any right to production of, or access to, any document subject to legal professional privilege. However, the order has effect notwithstanding any other obligation as to secrecy or other restriction on disclosure of information. 684 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

Provision is made for the retention by, or return to, a person of documents where the documents are required for the purposes of a person’s business or other legitimate purpose. The person must undertake in writing to keep the documents safely and securely and when requested, to furnish them to the Garda in connection with any criminal proceedings for which they are required. Documents taken away by a garda under section 15 may be retained for use as evidence in any criminal proceedings. These provisions are targeted at witnesses, not suspects. Accordingly, to preserve the right against self incrimination, a statement or admission made by a person pursuant to an order under section 15 is not admissible as evidence in proceedings against the person for an offence, other than an offence under the section itself. A person who fails or refuses to comply with an order under section 15 is guilty of an offence. Provision is also made for an offence of providing false or misleading information or statements. A person who fails to comply with an undertaking given by him or her under this section is guilty of an offence. The offences will be punishable by unlimited fines and up to two years imprisonment or both. Access to documents by the Garda Síochána can be severely delayed by claims of legal privilege which give rise to applications to the High Court. Section 16 contains provisions aimed at reducing such delays by making provision for determining legal professional privilege issues which arise in District Court orders under section 15 requiring the disclosure of documents to the Garda. Under the new provisions, where a person refuses to disclose a document or give access to it pursuant to a court order under section 15 on the grounds that it is privileged legal material, the Garda or the person concerned may apply to a District Court judge for a determination as to whether the document is privileged legal material. Pending the determination of the application, the person concerned is obliged to preserve the document and keep it in a safe and secure place. The District Court judge may also give interim or interlocutory directions, including, in a case involving a substantial volume of documents, the appointment of an experienced, independent person with legal qualifications to examine the documents and prepare a report for the judge with a view to facilitating the court’s determination as to the documents. Rules of court may make provision for the expeditious hearing of applications and appeals under section 16. Section 17 provides for an offence relating to the falsification, concealment or destruction of documents relevant to a Garda investigation into a relevant offence. The offence is punishable by an unlimited fine and imprisonment for up to five years or both. Section 18 provides for certain evidential presumptions to arise where documents are admitted as evidence in proceedings for a relevant offence. It provides for presumptions on the creation, ownership, receipt and other matters relating to documents. These presumptions may be rebutted by the defendant. This provision is important to streamline the way in which requirements in relation to evidence can be met concerning documents submitted in complex white collar crime cases. Section 19 provides for a new offence, similar to the former misprision of felony offence, which relates to the failure to report information to the Garda. The offence will apply to a person who has information which he or she knows or believes might be of material assistance in preventing the commission of a relevant offence or in securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of another person for such an offence. A person who fails without reasonable excuse to disclose such information as soon as practicable to the Garda Síochána will be guilty of an offence. The offence is punishable by an unlimited fine and imprisonment for up to five 685 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] years or both. A similar offence is contained in section 9 of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998 but in that Act it is limited to certain serious offences. Section 20 is a standard provision regarding offences by bodies corporate. The Schedule sets out the offences which will be “relevant offences” for the purposes of the Bill. A number of additional offences are being further examined in consultation with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation and the Department of Finance to assess whether they meet the criteria for inclusion in the Schedule to the Bill. If it is subsequently decided that they meet the criteria, I propose to add them to the Schedule by way of Committee Stage amendment, if time permits. An alternative approach is, of course, to add any qualifying offences to the Schedule by way of order made under the Bill after it is enacted. I described at an earlier point the capacity of the Minister to make such orders. I am introducing this Bill quickly to deal with issues that are currently causing problems and delaying or potentially delaying the investigation and prosecution of white collar crime. It is an important step in ensuring that the white collar criminal will be vigorously pursued by the authorities of the State. The Government is of course committed to addressing all aspects of white collar crime and my proposals go beyond the measures to be contained in the Criminal Justice Bill. The programme for Government contains a commitment to enact legislation to strengthen the powers of the Criminal Assets Bureau on the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime. The Criminal Assets Bureau now has 15 years practical experience in the operation of the proceeds of crime legislation. That experience will inform the work of an expert group, comprising representatives from the bureau, my Department and the Office of the Attorney General, which is reviewing the operation of the legislation with a view to identifying measures that would further strengthen the law in this area. The subject of white collar crime has also been a key component in the White Paper on crime process under way in my Department. It was addressed specifically in a consultation seminar held late last year along with a discussion document and a call for written submissions. A wide range of detailed submissions were received and these have provided important insights into this complex issue. A report on the submissions received has been published recently and many of the issues raised are being targeted in this piece of legislation. More generally, the input received will feed into the deliberations leading to the White Paper itself. The ultimate objective of the White Paper process is to provide a comprehensive framework for future crime policy, in the form of a national anti-crime strategy. If this framework is to have credibility and protect society in the broadest sense, it is vitally important that it addresses white collar crime as well as so called “street crime”. We must put an end to any hint of a culture that suggests that the white collar criminal is a protected species. In this Bill, I am proposing to give the Garda and the prosecutors the powers, and to provide for the procedures, that they have told me are necessary to help them to investigate white collar crime and to bring prosecutions more efficiently. I am committed to removing any sense that the white collar criminal can act with impunity. In that respect, today I make a promise to the Irish people that if more is needed, more will be done. I have absolutely no doubt that everyone in the State wants to ensure that where there is criminality, in particular in the context of white collar crime, investigations are facilitated to be undertaken with speed and as comprehensively as possible and that, where required, prosecutions are initiated at an early stage. I am aware of substantial public concern at the length of time being taken in completing some of the very important investigations that are currently under way. Enactment of this Bill would provide additional assistance following its enactment 686 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage to gardaí conducting any investigation that is current at the date of this Bill coming into force. It is for that particular reason that it is of crucial importance that the Bill is fully considered by the House, and for that reason it is being prioritised by the Government. As I stated at an earlier point, I hope for and look forward to the assistance and co-operation of Deputies opposite in the processing of this measure through both Second and Committee Stages. I will state publicly on the record of the House what I stated privately to the Opposition spokespeople on justice, which is that when it comes to Committee Stage, in so far as constructive amendments are proposed that could improve the workings of the Bill and which can be accommodated within it, we will give very serious consideration to amendments proposed by Deputies opposite on Committee Stage.

Deputy Dara Calleary: I wish to share time with Deputy Niall Collins.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Olivia Mitchell): Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Dara Calleary: Fianna Fáil welcomes the fact that the Government has prioritised the Criminal Justice Bill 2011, particularly given the amount of work done by the previous Minister, Dermot Ahern, and I want to acknowledge that in the House today. I want to acknowledge the Minister’s own efforts in ensuring early publication of the Bill in the lifetime of the new Dáil and the future plans in this area which he outlined. We will support the Bill. We may submit amendments and I want to acknowledge that since his appointment, the Mini- ster has been very co-operative with this party and others. The Minister is correct to state the damage caused by white collar crime is immense. Over the years, there has been a tendency to judge it differently from other crimes, but we see the damage caused in this country in recent years by difficulties in this area. The characteristics of white collar crime include deceit, the violation of trust and, above all, a pursuit through dis- honest means of personal or business advantage. Let us be very clear that white collar crime is every bit as much a crime as any other and those who engage in it deserve that the full force of the law be applied. The Bill considerably strengthens the armoury of the State with regard to this. However, we must be realistic, and in considering this issue I cannot but refer to the remarks of Mr. Justice Peter Kelly in connection with the pace of the ongoing investigations by various organisations in the country. Mr. Justice Kelly commented, “An apparent failure to investigate thoroughly yet efficiently and expeditiously possible criminal wrongdoing in the commercial/corporate sectors does nothing to instil confidence in the criminal justice system.” This is a damning indictment on many people, not only in this House. It is fair to state we have produced much legislation but Mr. Justice Kelly is putting it up to us to ensure that legislation is properly implemented. Mr. Justice Kelly also highlighted comments made by another senior Commercial Court judge, Mr. Justice Frank Clarke, in a judgment delivered in April in a case where full admissions were made about engaging in practices which were unlawful under many headings. Mr. Justice Clarke was made to comment that no further action had been seen to be taken in that instance either. In his concluding remarks, the Minister referred to the concerns of the general public about the slowness of these investigations. In the context of us strengthening the powers available to those who investigate these crimes, we must also challenge them to use the powers they already have more efficiently and to be conscious of the great expectation of the people of the country, looking for answers to so many issues that have happened in recent years, that is on the shoulders of these investigators. 687 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Dara Calleary.]

The comments quoted were not made by politicians courting publicity or votes but by the judges of this State who we have entrusted with deciding on the laws enacted by the Oireachtas. It is time those in charge of pursuing those cases get their act together and brought them to a satisfactory conclusion. I welcome the fact Mr. Justice Peter Kelly has put that challenge to them. The notion of national recovery cannot be limited to a financial one. The national recovery of self-confidence is as important and it will depend on successful outcomes under the various headings of this Bill. In this regard I welcome the fact the Minister has gone out of his way to emphasise that provisions in this Bill can be used in current investigations. That is why there is an urgency to progress the Bill through the House as quickly as possible. I would like to ensure that before we complete the debate in both Houses, the Bill is as legally robust as possible in light of the resources available to those who may challenge it. It is also important to ensure the Bill is accompanied by sufficient resources in order to tackle the authorities and to retrain their staff to use new powers being made available to them. I refer in particular to the powers being made available in information technology. The legislation is a culmination of efforts undertaken by the previous Minister, Dermot Ahern. This time last year the former Minister formally requested the Garda Commissioner to bring forward proposals for change in the criminal law in this area. Last October, he launched the public consultation document referred to by the Minister, Organised and White Collar Crime, and in December, he announced approval for the drafting of this Bill. Following this, at the beginning of the last Dáil session, Fianna Fáil made it clear it would prioritise the publication and enactment a Bill and on 1 February, we announced that we had approved the text of such a Bill. However, it could not be published following the dissolution of the Dáil. The Minister outlined the key provisions. The detention for questioning provisions ensure changes to the existing law. The provision whereby a person may be detained for questioning by the Garda for a specified period will be amended to allow the period of detention to be broken into segments and the person released in the intervening periods. The Garda will be able to detain and question an individual for part of the period, release that person while it makes further inquiries into what was said and then require the individual to return to the Garda station at a later stage for the continuation of the detention. This is necessary given the extent and depth of data. The complex nature of recent investigations has shown that it is not always possible to complete questioning and check facts in one period of detention. The provision applies to this Bill only and it is welcome. The Minister is committed to publishing detailed regulations in this regard and I ask that they are published on Committee Stage or Report Stage to ensure we have a comprehensive debate on them and their potential impact on citizens of this State. The requirement to make a statement provision is also welcome. In order to delay, or for other reasons, there has been a reluctance on the part of potential witnesses to make statements to assist the Garda in current and previous investigations. The Bill provides a mechanism whereby an obligation can be imposed on witnesses as well as companies to provide information, answer questions and make statements in regard to investigations into relevant offences. The Bill provides for applications to the District Court by the Garda for orders requiring the production of material or the provision of information by answering questions or making a statement containing the information for the purposes of the investigation of a relevant offence. The fact that this has been reduced to the District Court is welcome and should expedite the process. A person who fails to comply with the order will be guilty of an offence 688 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage and provision is also being made for the offence of providing false or misleading information or statements. This is a particularly welcome provision given the danger that false or misleading can be provided in order to delay an investigation. Recent and ongoing investigations have seen large numbers of documents being provided to the Garda without any effort to index material or to certify the material in a manner that would allow its admissibility in court as evidence without the need for witnesses to prove them. The sheer volume and complex nature of documentation has been a source of much delay. Section 15 provides that where the District Court orders the production of material under that section it may order the person to identify and categorise the material in a particular manner. It is assumed that regulations will be published in this regard. If the Minister could publish them on Committee Stage or Report Stage it would make for easier passage of the Bill and for a more informed discussion. This Bill specifically examines the issue of withholding information and it provides for a new offence similar to the former misprision of felony offence which relates to the failure to report information to the Garda. A person who has information which he or she knows or believes might be of material assistance in preventing the commission by another person of a relevant offence or in securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of another person for such an offence and who fails without reasonable excuse to disclose such information as soon as practicable to the Garda will be guilty of an offence. However, we should use this debate to reiterate the fact that we should not necessarily need the threat of an offence or a fine or imprisonment. People who have information which may assist an investigation should come forward immediately. Everybody shares the frustrations in regard to the delays and if people have information which may assist investigations, they should come forward. The Minister outlined changes to the period of questioning, in particular between the hours of midnight and 8 a.m. He also committed to introducing regulations in this area. I reiterate my remarks on the need to publish those regulations on Committee Stage. The Bill provides that no questioning of a detained person may take place until he or she has had access to legal advice. This is subject to two exceptions, namely, where he or she has waived the right to consult or the garda in charge has authorised questioning on the grounds that to delay would involve a risk of injury to an other persons, serious damage to property or loss of or interference with evidence, accomplices evading, etc. Member of the Garda Síochána have always adopted this approach in an informal manner and they should be praised for doing so. However, it is now necessary in this litigious environment to place this on a legal footing. Again, I hope the regulations in this area will not be framed in such a way as to choke the ability of the Garda to source information or to manage its affairs in a way which has been successful to date. I hope the Minister will consult the Garda in regard to this area. The Bill also provides for the detention clock to stop, subject to a maximum period, pending a solicitor making himself or herself available for a consultation. I hope that maximum period will not be too generous because it is not unknown for people to delay their arrival at a Garda station in order to prevent questioning or prevent an investigation. We welcome the fact the Minister has introduced the Bill quickly. However, in his response to this debate I would like him to comment on the remarks made by Mr. Justice Peter Kelly in regard to the Anglo Irish Bank investigation. When the Minister was on this side of the House he was justifiably critical of the slow pace of that investigation. It has not quickened as a result of his move to the other side of the House.

Deputy Alan Shatter: This legislation should have been enacted a year ago. 689 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

Deputy Dara Calleary: The Minister would have to accept that a considerable amount of legislation was put in place.

Deputy Alan Shatter: Not this.

Deputy Dara Calleary: Mr. Justice Peter Kelly made it very clear that there is legislation in place but his remarks were particularly directed at the day-to-day management. Before we conclude Second Stage, I hope the Minister will update the House on the progress of that investigation and on whether he has taken any action following Mr. Justice Kelly’s remarks. For a senior law officer of the State to slap across the head rather than the hand a regulatory investigator of this State is unprecedented. I look forward to the Minister updating the House on that investigation. My party will support this Bill, much of which was prepared by the former Minister, Dermot Ahern. We will table amendments on Committee Stage but I hope the Minister will publish the necessary regulations during the course of the debate on this Bill. We speak of the rapid implementation of this Bill, which would be assisted if a committee was set up some time before Christmas. I understand the Minister’s party has been asked to signify its committee choices but that has not been communicated to the Whips. It is important that we get the committee up and running in order to consider this legislation. There will be no delay from the Fianna Fáil Party in arriving at the Minister’s deadline of the end of the session.

Deputy Niall Collins: I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this Bill and to stand opposite the new Minister for Justice and Equality. I have changed capacity since I last stood before him. I wish him well in his job. We saw him ably representing us with the queen this week and carrying out his functions as Minister for Justice and Equality. I welcome the publication of this Bill and many of the elements in it are badly needed. We must take every opportunity to equip An Garda Síochána with the necessary tools to do its job as effectively as possible in the shortest possible time. The Anglo Irish Bank investigation is hugely frustrating as people consider the length of time it has taken. It is a matter of public concern. When my party was on the other side of the House, we expressed views and the then Opposition expressed its views. We all have a common purpose. Most criminal justice legislation passes with little division. Much of it has the broad support of most Members, as is right and proper. Much debate about An Garda Síochána concerns financial resources and personnel and this has detracted from the focus on the legislation available to the Garda Síochána. The last Dáil passed much legislation that improved 5o’clock the powers on gangland investigation, prosecution and criminal activities. The focus now is on white collar crime, which has been under the radar for many years. The people involved in these activities dealt in complex operations, which are now costing the State much money and costing all of us dearly. We must keep in mind the other prosecution agencies, such as the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. I take on board the previous comments of my colleague, Deputy Dara Calleary, and the recent comments of the judge. We must question whether such agencies are well resourced to do their job. When I was a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, the Garda Commissioner appeared before us and he was always asked if he had enough resources to do his job. He always said he had enough resources and manpower. I would like to hear if the Director of Corporate Enforcement has enough resources to do his job. A public statement from him would be welcome and it would inform us why he is taking so long. We should not place too much emphasis on trying to rush him. The result is what is important. 690 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

Some of the provisions in the Bill are demanding in terms of the requirements to make a statement. This provision is quite necessary. We have seen a reluctance to make statements over the years and it has frustrated the investigation process. I refer to the provisions concerning legal privilege, documentary evidence and questioning people between midnight and 8 a.m. These measures are warranted and necessary. We must have a degree of balance in terms of the protection of people’s reputation. We have issues from time to time where we must strive to protect people’s reputation. If people are questioned and associated with an investigation and that information is put into the public domain, it can be greatly damaging to people’s reputation if they are obviously innocent and proven to be so. We must ensure there are safeguards from that point of view.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Olivia Mitchell): I call Deputy Jonathan O’Brien. Is Deputy O’Brien sharing time?

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: I am not aware of it but if I am, I will not complain.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Olivia Mitchell): Deputy Jonathan O’Brien has 30 minutes in that case.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: Great. The introduction of legislation in an attempt to deal with the growing plague of white collar crime has long been called for by Members on all sides in this House as well as wider society outside this Chamber. The recent collapse of the global economy has kick-started that conversation on white collar crime and how it is sometimes portrayed as a victimless crime. We can consider recent scandals at an international level or closer to home, such as the failure of the Irish banking system and the revelations from tribunals contained in the Moriarty report. This has caused great anguish among wider society and it has pushed the need for stiffer legislation to deal with white collar crime to the top of the political agenda. The term white collar crime is often described as a generic term for non-violent crimes, motivated primarily by personal gain, and committed by businesspeople or public officials. While there is no fixed definition of what constitutes a white collar crime, the Department of Justice and Equality defines white collar crime as offences classified as non-violent illegal activities which principally involve traditional notions of deceit, deception, concealment, manipu- lation, breach of trust or illegal circumvention. People outside the Chamber hear these phrases but to the ordinary person on the street this means fraud, tax evasion, bribery, kickbacks, brown envelopes and political favours to name just a few. The term white collar crime was first coined by Edwin Sutherland to describe the criminal behaviour of an elite class of people. There is a myth that white collar crime is a victimless one, but nothing could be further from the truth. A single act of white collar crime has the potential to destroy a company, devastate families by wiping out their life savings, or cost investors billions of euros or even all three, as in the Enron case. By its nature, white collar crime can be difficult to investigate and therefore to prove. This Bill proposes to introduce measures whose aim is to assist the Garda Síochána in the investigation and prosecution of this complex area. The introduction of legislation that will once and for all deal comprehensively with white collar crime is essential if this establishment is to restore confidence and credibility in our judicial and political systems. Justice is meant to be blind but if one was to look at the number of people in Irish jails today and study what they are in there for, one could be forgiven for thinking white collar crime is a myth. There is a justifiable, widespread public perception that not enough has been done in the past to tackle white collar crime. That is a view shared by all sides in this House. 691 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Jonathan O’Brien.]

This has led to a lack of confidence in our judicial system to deal adequately with white collar crime. Recent comments by Mr. Justice Peter Kelly support this assertion. He stated: “An apparent failure to investigate thoroughly, yet efficiently, possible criminal wrongdoing in the commercial corporate sectors does nothing to instil confidence in the criminal justice system.” I understand the urgency behind the motives of the Minister to introduce this legislation but we must also be careful that people outside the House do not view it as this Chamber rushing to introduce legislation. After all, rushed legislation very often turns out to be poor. This Bill was only published last Friday and we are already discussing it, although only on Second Stage. We must still be very careful to study the Bill and I hope it will not become the norm that we get copies of legislation on Friday and discuss it two or three days later. Nevertheless, I understand the urgency behind the issue. I commit myself and my party to working with the Minister to ensure the passage of any useful legislation concerning white collar crime in as quick a manner as is possible. I also put on record my personal appreciation of the Minister’s comments about possible amendments and I hope we can work together on potential amendments to ensure they are taken on board. We need from the Government a timetable for key white collar crime prevention measures and real legislation to deal with corporate fraud in the State. We need a comprehensive and clear corporate liability for corruption offences and an immunity and leniency programme for certain witnesses who are also accomplices to offences, as this is a necessary weapon against white collar crime. Mr. Shane Murphy SC recently indicated that we have the weapons for prosecution but we are choosing not to use them, and the Director of Public Prosecutions is reluctant to engage in a general programme that would grant full or partial immunity to informants who expose wrongdoing at banks and financial institutions. The reality is that cases are being built against individuals and not necessarily against companies, even if the company has a case to answer. The OECD working group on bribery recently recommended that Ireland should codify and clarify the liability of legal persons for bribery offences. The identification doctrine whereby the acts of the persons controlling a company can constitute acts of the company is currently insufficient, and in Britain there has been an expansion of the criteria for what constitutes a legal person for the purposes of bribery legislation. The prosecution of legal as well as natural persons for corruption-related offences will serve as a powerful deterrent against corporate complicity in bribery and corruption. We also need a firm commitment that there will be adequate resourcing for the gardaí in order to investigate and detect offences. Clear sentencing guidelines for corruption-related offences must be introduced and a timetable for the ratification of international conventions against corruption should be announced. Every time we speak in the Chamber I go on about sentencing guidelines because they are crucial in all areas of criminal justice. Companies in the dock must prove that anti-bribery measures employed are taken into account. Arguments made that non-custodial offences for white collar crimes are preferably based on the notion of restitution alone reinforce the perception that offenders of lower social status are less likely to be treated fairly in comparison to those in higher income brackets and of professional standing. There is a saying that I do not like but which argues that those in suits are treated more fairly than those in tracksuits. It is nonetheless apt. Sentencing guidelines and education for the Judiciary on the obvious workings of fraud and white collar crime must be put in place. We are all living with the results of such crime. Sentencing guidelines that draw attention to the socioeconomic impact of white collar crime and corruption would assist in 692 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage ensuring consistency and fairness in sentencing. They would also help underscore the intended deterrent effect of sanctions contained in existing legislation. There must be consequences for those involved in such acts so they do not happen again and we can break the cycle of acceptability of corporate crime and fraud. This would involve a multidimensional approach to punishing corrupt or fraudulent behaviour, which includes custodial sentences proportionate to the impact of the crime, together with a system of financial compensation for the victims of corruption-related offences, which would be consistent with Article 9 of the Council of Europe Civil Law Convention on Corruption. Such a system could be effectively informed by the use of socioeconomic victim impact statements and even community impact statements. One can consider the recent revelations from Anglo Irish Bank and the damage these caused; not one person in the State would be unwilling to write a victim impact statement on these consequences. The programme for Government not only commits to legislation dealing with white collar crime but also the introduction of legislation dealing with whistleblowers. We must create a position where people are given all the protection necessary to facilitate them to report corporate misconduct. This will not only increase the amount of white collar crime prosecutions and introduce a greater level of accountability within companies but could help create an ethos where corruption is no longer tolerated. We need that as soon as possible, and we need all the tools necessary to bring about a culture change in corporate Ireland. Legislation in this area has been overly complex and allows certain categories of persons to report very specific offences. Some will argue that introducing this Bill, which attempts to deal with white collar crime before introducing legislation regarding whistleblowers, could be seen as putting the cart before the horse. The promised legislation on whistleblowers must be published at the earliest possible opportunity and I ask that the Minister take that on board. In the absence of such legislation I commend Transparency International for launching a new helpline, which will go live on Thursday, 26 May, entitled Speak Up. That is a free information helpline offering support for people with ethical dilemmas or who have concerns about possible wrongdoing within the workplace. It is one of the first of its kind in western Europe and is partially funded by the European Union. There is already a wide range of legislation and regulatory measures in place to deal with white collar crime but it is very often sectoral and specific and does not cover the whole sphere of white collar crime. The current use of enforcement measures has been highlighted by some commentators as a greater impediment to the prosecution of white collar crime rather than a lack of suitable legislation. At the recent Irish Criminal Bar Association conference on white collar crime, Dominic McGinn SC stated:

It is clear from the breadth and scope of the regulatory scheme which has been in place since 2004 and from the myriad criminal provisions which have a potential bearing on this sector that the banking crisis of 2008 was not caused through want of a regulatory scheme or criminal sanctions. Rather, it appears that the enforcement measures, which were available to properly regulate the banking industry, were not employed to their full potential, if at all.

Further investment in the enforcement of laws and regulations preventing economic crime is imperative. Any fines or settlements arising from prosecutions of white collar criminals and corporations should therefore be allocated to a ring-fenced central fund which could be used for future investigations and prevention measures. Likewise, any embargoes on recruitment to positions providing essential investigation services in law enforcement agencies should be removed. There have been the statements from the AGSI that there are insufficient officers in 693 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Jonathan O’Brien.] the Garda bureau of fraud investigations to tackle white collar crime and that must be addressed. The area of corporate manslaughter is one which also needs attention. If an individual within a company, namely a company director, engages in white collar crime and this leads to the death of an employee, that person must be held accountable for his or her actions. This can arise when the company director breaches safety or environmental regulations in order to make personal financial gain. The Bill includes a number of principal themes, the first of which is the suspension of detention. Since 1984, detention has become the norm and detention periods have been extended considerably. A detention period, or clock as it is more commonly known, runs from the time a person is brought to a Garda station until the detention time permitted under the particular legislation covering the arrest has elapsed. The clock may stop or be suspended during detention in limited circumstances, for example, current law allows for the suspension of questioning between midnight and 8 a.m. where the Garda in charge of the station is of the opinion that questioning should be postponed in order to allow the suspect to rest. Currently the suspect must consent in writing to the suspension but this Bill will introduce the suspension of questioning between midnight and 8 a.m. generally and the suspension will not depend on the opinion of the member in charge. However, questioning will not be suspended where the detained person objects to the suspension or the member in charge of the station authorises continued questioning on the grounds that to delay would involve a risk of injury to other persons, serious damage to property or interference with accomplices. The Minister outlined one such scenario in respect of kidnapping cases. Currently, the clock may also be stopped if a person is taken from a Garda station to a hospital or other suitable place for medical attention. The Bill does not change these provisions. The Bill does however propose two major changes in respect of the suspension of the detention clock. Section 7 of the Bill proposes to allow detention periods for relevant offences to be broken into segments where there are reasonable grounds for doing so. A person could, for example, be detained for two hours initially and the remainder of the detention resumed at a later date following further investigation. We are told that the rationale behind this change is that white collar crime is often complex and involves large amounts of data. The Bill proposes that detention periods may only be suspended on two occasions and the entirety of the detention must take place within a four month period. While I agree that the investigation of white collar crime is a complex process a number of questions remain to be answered. What happens during the period of suspension? Does the suspect have to surrender his or her passport and will he or she be allowed to carry on working? What recourse is available if his or her employers suspend him or her pending the outcome of the investigation? It is possible that an individual could be detained, released and detained for questioning again over a period of as long as four months. We must take care that the Bill does not infringe the most basic principle of our judicial system, that is, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. If somebody is brought in for questioning and the detention period is suspended, the case will be hanging over that individual’s head and people will always presume there is no smoke without fire. This aspect of the Bill warrants further discussion and explanation as it progresses through the House. Section 9 of the Bill allows for the detention clock to be stopped while a suspect waits to consult with his or her solicitor in person or over the telephone. This will prolong the period of detention for many suspects depending on how long it takes for a solicitor to arrive or become available to consult by telephone. The Bill provides that the period will not exceed three hours or any such shorter period as the Minister may prescribe by regulation. The clock may be stopped for six hours where a person detained pursuant to section 4 of the 1984 Act 694 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage objects to the suspension of questioning between midnight and 8 a.m. In effect this will allow for the establishment of two separate clocks, a detention clock and an investigation clock. The Bill suggests that a failure on the part of a member of the Garda Síochána to observe a provision of the regulations on a suspect accessing a lawyer shall not affect the lawfulness of the custody of the detained person or the admissibility in evidence of any statement made by him or her. However, any breach of these regulations may render a Garda liable to disciplinary action. I ask for clarification on this issue because it raises the question of how evidence obtained during a period when a member of the Garda breaches regulations can be considered lawful. One of the more frustrating issues facing those who prosecute white collar crime has been the slow pace of the investigations. Failure to compel suspects to co-operate with an investigation, produce documentation in a speedy manner or provide information relating to passwords for personal computers can stop an investigation in its tracks. Section 15 addresses this frustration by giving the Garda the power to apply to the District Court for orders to compel witnesses to answer questions or provide statements and to produce documents. The documents must refer to relevant offences and any information provided must have been obtained in the ordinary course of business. The questions to be answered must be set out in the application to the District Court. Before making an order under section 15, the court must be satisfied there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that a person has control or possession of particular documents, that the documents are relevant to the investigation, that the documents may constitute evidence of or relating to the commission of that offence and that the documents should be produced or access granted because of the benefit likely to accrue to the investigation and other relevant circumstances. Some advocacy groups have expressed concern about forcing witnesses to answer questions but, while I share those concerns, radical steps are necessary if we are to deal with white collar crime once and for all. Section 15 also contains an important power in regard to the presentation of evidence. When a court makes an order to produce documents under section 15 it can also specify how the documents should be identified and categorised. That will help because the section also requires the production of a certificate or statement of evidence identifying and indexing the relevant documentation allowing its admissibility, thereby avoiding hearsay evidence rules. The Bill also deals with the issue of privilege. Section 16(3) allows a person who refuses to produce or give access to the document ordered under section 15 to apply to the District Court for a determination as to whether the document in question is privileged. The Garda may also apply to the District Court for a determination as to privilege where a person refuses to produce or allow access to a document. Where there is a substantial number of documents to be examined a judge of the District Court has the option to appoint an experienced and independent person with suitable legal qualifications to examine the documents and make conclusions. Section 19 proposes to create a new offence of withholding information in respect of relevant offences, to be punishable by up to a maximum of five years imprisonment and-or an unlimited fine. Section 19 states that a person will be guilty of an offence if he or she has information which he or she knows to be or believes may be of material assistance in preventing the commission by any other person of a relevant offence or securing the apprehension, prosecution or conviction of any other person for said offence. This places a much heavier onus than heretofore on witnesses to report potential or actual crimes. This again points to the importance of the introduction of the promised whistleblowers legislation, and I urge the Minister to bring it forward. There is no date for its publication but it should go hand in hand with the legislation we are discussing. 695 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Jonathan O’Brien.]

I commend the Minister on acting in such a speedy manner in bringing forward this Bill. White collar crime affects everybody and I look forward to debating the detail of the Bill as it progresses through the House and to examining the regulations the Minister has promised. I reiterate that he will have every co-operation from this side of the House in regard to any legislation which will, once and for all, nail the issue of white collar crime.

Deputy Catherine Murphy: I propose to share time with Deputies Pringle, Mattie McGrath and Clare Daly.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Olivia Mitchell): That is agreed.

Deputy Catherine Murphy: Given the personal impact on almost every household in the country of the economic crash it is understandable that there should be a demand for those who caused the problem to be punished. The question is whether this Bill will help to achieve that end. I watched part of RTE’s “Prime Time” programme last night which featured two key figures in the national downfall, namely, Seán Dunne, who owes €350 million to NAMA and is recon- structing his life and that of his family in the United States, and David Drumm, who took over from Seán FitzPatrick at Anglo Irish Bank, the bank that sucked tens of billions of taxpayers’ money and contributed to our national downfall. While tens of thousands of people are struggling to keep a roof over their heads and almost 450,000 are unemployed, the guys who were at the heart of the crash are living in leafy suburbs in the United States rebuilding their lives in a way that is not possible for the vast majority of people in this State. They have helped to bankrupt our country and appear to have walked away largely unscathed. The final insult was the revelation in last night’s programme that the Revenue Commis- sioners have paid Mr. Drumm a rebate of €11,000. That is truly galling. It seems both men’s greatest asset is their wives to whom they have transferred assets. The outrage felt by the public in the face of these revelations is building rather than diminishing. There is a growing demand that these people face, and be seen to face, consequences for their actions, and that these should include, where appropriate, prison sentences. I thank the Oireachtas Library service for its briefing document and the explanatory memor- andum which accompanies the Bill. While I generally support the Bill, there are several issues about which I have concerns. First is the provision regarding the stopping of the detention clock. Hopefully there will be an opportunity to tease this out on Committee Stage and I note what the Minister said earlier. I am concerned that this may impinge on certain constitutional rights and would thus be open to challenge. We are dealing with people who have the financial means to issue such a challenge. There is little point enacting new legislation if the problem originates with poor regulation and inadequate resources. When I was previously a member of the Dáil between 2005 and 2007 there were several occasions when the Director of Corporate Enforcement sought additional staff resources, but these requests were denied by the then Fianna Fáil Government. The director complained at that time of a heavy workload and voiced concerns about his office’s ability to do its job as effectively as he wished. The reality is that enforcement costs money. Without adequate resources we cannot hope to change the culture that exists and will merely expose ourselves to a repeat of the problems we are currently encountering. The document from the Oireachtas Library includes a statement by Dominic McGinn, senior counsel, at a recent Irish Criminal Bar Association conference on white collar crime: 696 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

If lessons are to be learnt from the 2008 crash, they must surely be not to jump to introduce new legislation, not to create new criminal offences specifically targeted at bankers and not to undertake a radical overhaul of the financial regulatory system. Instead the logical steps would be to trawl through the existing Statute Book where there are more than enough well drafted provisions with which to punish wrongdoers and, more importantly, to dust off the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority Act 2003 and actually use the carefully crafted structure contained therein to regulate the system proactively.

There is little evidence that this has been done, but it must be done. Clearly there are some new measures in this Bill that are required, including the provisions relating to legal privilege. Mr. Justice Peter Kelly was not heeded when he urged Anglo Irish Bank to reconsider some of its claims to legal professional privilege. We all remember the controversy about the passwords in the case of that institution. There is little point in having laws if they are not adequately enforced. With a public service recruitment embargo in place and the economy in crisis this is an issue that requires careful consideration. There must be an assessment of need within our regulatory and enforcement services. Where there are undue delays because of inadequate resources, employing additional staff may pay considerable divid- ends in terms of restoring confidence that our systems can work and that the guilty will be punished in a timely way. That is the benchmark against which the Government will be measured — not necessarily the amount of legislation that is enacted but how effective our laws are. Earlier this month Mr. Justice Peter Kelly expressed dissatisfaction with the time it was taking to conclude the investigation into Anglo Irish Bank. While l appreciate that it is a complex investigation, a timeframe of two and a half years is not acceptable, as I am sure the Minister will agree. The vast majority of citizens consider it outrageous. Another issue of concern to me relates to the timing of the promised generic whistleblower legislation, which is included in the C list in the legislative programme. There is an issue of natural justice here particularly given that a new obligation is being introduced in the legislation we are discussing which requires an employee to disclose information he or she believes may be of material assistance in preventing the commission of an offence. It is simply wrong not to enact the whistleblowers legislation in parallel. In a situation where someone wishes to return to work following a court appearance, for example, such a return is not viable without that type of protection. We all know there has been huge reputational damage done to Ireland in recent years, largely as a result of actions by persons in the banking sector. However, the programme last night again highlighted the same culture of developers ignoring the laws in the US. Other cultures need to be changed here. While the Bill primarily deals with white collar crime, is there scope to deal with other matters such as those raised in the television programme on taxis on Monday night? It was clear people with serious criminal convictions were working in the industry and members of the public were at risk. If appropriate, provisions should be included in the Bill to address that issue.

Deputy Thomas Pringle: The Bill aims to make it easier for the Garda to investigate white collar crime and complex crime cases. It deals with a range of offences relating to banking, investment funds and financial services activities and its provisions will also have benefits in wider criminal investigations. There is a great deal of frustration and anger in the country about the lack of movement on the prosecution of fraudulent activity in the banks. Why it took more than 13 months for 697 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Thomas Pringle.] anyone to be arrested and questioned about the goings on in Anglo Irish Bank is a source of huge anger in our communities. We have also heard that the former chief executive officer of Irish Nationwide Building Society has still not repaid his €1 million retirement bonus, despite everything that had gone on in that institution. Too often in Ireland we have been good at bringing in regulation and very weak at enforcing it. This is at its most obvious in the banks and the banking fiasco that we have suffered through over the past three years and will pay for for many years to come. In the words of the song, “an outlaw robs you with a gun and a banker with a fountain pen” but the bankers walk away with golden handshakes and massive bonuses. We need to change drastically the view among the establishment in Ireland that the only criminals are those who deal in drugs or those involved in violent crime or robbery. White collar crime is just as poison- ous in society and has to be treated as such. Transparency International’s 2009 country study states:

Financial regulations, where they have applied to Ireland’s financial sector, appear to have been enforced sporadically. Irish businesses have also lagged behind other countries in terms of their commitment to fraud and corruption risk management.

If this legislation contributes to changing these attitudes, then it will be welcome. However, the study also states, “legislation, new anti-corruption bodies and increased resources will not effect change on their own” and what needs to change is the “ambivalence that appears to be shared by many in positions of authority”. The Bill attempts to make it easier for the Garda to investigate white collar crime by ensuring information is provided in a timely, organised fashion and it also creates a new offence of not reporting a crime by individuals who may be aware of it. It also provides for the suspension of detention in certain circumstances, most notably between 12 midnight and 8 a.m. This provision is also welcome because we have to remember that any person being questioned should be subject to the presumption of innocence and we need to keep that in mind at all times. I understand this provision will apply for all suspects, except murder suspects, in Garda custody. Too often in the past, suspects have admitted crimes under duress that could have been caused by lack of sleep and exhaustion that have led to high profile miscarriages of justice. A miscarriage of justice in white collar crime is just as serious as any miscarriage of justice and should not be tolerated. There is no shortage of legislation or regulation to prosecute white collar crime. As an eminent senior counsel stated at a recent Irish Criminal Bar Association conference, “the pros- ecutorial weapons are there, we are just choosing not to use them”. This could be because of the sectoral aspects of the crimes under the various Acts that govern white collar crime such as the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud) Act 2010, the Companies Acts 1963, Central Bank Acts and financial services authorities Act. This results in a complex system for the Garda and the DPP to trawl through. The other weakness in the system is the lack of comprehensive whistleblowers’ legislation. This is provided for in the programme for Government but, as has been stated, it has been placed on the C list in the legislative programme. This Bill will not be as effective as hoped without adequate protection for whistleblowers. Such protection is provided in some legislation but again it is sectoral in effect. This Bill needs to be promoted on the list to ensure the fight against white collar crime can be effective. Simple legislation could cover the public and private sectors and ensure people who highlight crime in the public interest do not suffer for that. 698 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

I hope the legislation makes the investigation process easier but we also need to change the attitudes to white collar crime that exist within the community and the establishment.

Deputy Mattie McGrath: Ba mhaith liom mo chomhgairdeachas a gabháil don Aire. I congratulate the Minister and wish him all the best in his portfolio. I welcome this overdue Bill relating to white collar crime. Recent episodes, particularly the inquiry into the operations of Anglo Irish Bank, have highlighted the need to amend the law on white collar crime. I compliment RTE and the journalists working on “Prime Time Investi- gates” for highlighting and exposing many of these issues but they are worrying and discon- certing for ordinary taxpayers who are trying to raise their families. The perception is there is one law for the rich and one law for the poor, which is unacceptable. That is a bad message to send out but I do not wish to shoot the messenger. Journalists do a good job in their investigations. However, recent episodes have been compounded and ordinary people are left shaking their heads with a sense of helplessness and disbelief that people in high profile positions in Anglo Irish Bank, which never had a branch on the high street, are not being prosecuted. We are paying the price for the near ruination of the country for which the bank is responsible and the other banks followed. People see these bankers can leave for foreign shores, live the high life and remain in business — some of them have claimed in recent times to be living on a frugal income. That causes huge anguish and trauma and it is a worrying trend in our society, especially for young people who have attended school and college and cannot get work when they graduate and provide for themselves. It leads to other forms of crime. A detailed investigation of requirements in this area was conducted by the previous Govern- ment. We must complete the passage of Bill, if at all possible, before the summer recess to avoid problems and delays in the investigation and prosecution of white collar crime. Fraud and corruption is being exposed at many levels and the latest scandal relating to the NCT is another example. I do not blame anybody because everybody is innocent until proven guilty but we have to restore people’s faith in all our systems and, in particular, in our legal system. Recently the Master of the High Court, Mr. Edmund Honohan, commented on cases coming before the courts and the extent to which ordinary business people were being pursued by financial institutions and State institutions such as the Revenue. They are being driven to distraction and, in some cases, sadly to such a state of despair that they have ended their own lives and their problems are left for their families. This has affected my constituents. I read newspaper reports of Mr. Honohan’s statement last weekend. He is in an interesting position and he was honest, open and frank in his comments. People may be aware of what he is talking about but it is not being picked up. I understand that if a person is entitled to a rebate from Revenue, but when there are question marks over individuals, there must be some way to withhold rebates. Withholding of tax by the Revenue comes into play for the self-employed if one’s C2 is not in order. One has to wait a long time to get it back — until all one’s accounts are in order. Surely it is not beyond the powers that be to withhold rebates to people who have question marks having over them. White collar crime is as damaging, if not more damaging, to our society and indeed our economic security and survival as the more conventional crime. We must try to make it easier for the authorities, especially An Garda Síochána, to deal with it. They need to be equipped with the necessary tools because such crime is highly sophisticated. It must be treated as such. There is a moral and social obligation on us not to allow such reckless and criminal behaviour to be perceived as acceptable by future generations of business leaders. We must send a clear signal that the type of practices that have brought us close to ruination cannot be repeated. 699 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Mattie McGrath.] That requires all of us to consider our values but also it requires strict legal parameters around unscrupulous business activities, so that there can be no ambiguity; about right and wrong. The previous Financial Regulator utterly failed to do his duty. The duties of his office were completely neglected. He went off into the sunset with his pay-off and pension. I am aware of contracts from my business experience. If one enters into a contract it is a two-way street. Both parties are obliged to fulfil the contract. If one does not, one does not get paid. That is what ordinary people are putting up with. All Oireachtas Members have received communications from people working for a company in this country who currently have problems getting paid. If one completes a contract one expects to get paid, but if one is in breach of it one does not expect to get paid. Ordinary people are bewildered as to how that can happen and how it did happen. It is just not good enough. The message we need to send out at every possible opportunity is that Ireland is open for business in an honest, open and straightforward fashion. Enacting and implementing the legislation will go some way towards restoring business confidence in the county and will be another step in our recovery. Small and medium sized business is overwhelmed by the amount of regulation and red tape. Up to 99% of people in that sector do not have time to even contem- plate white collar crime. That is my honest belief. I hope that once we emerge from the recession, we will have stronger systems, that are fit for purpose in the modern business world and will involve penalties that will make people think twice before they consider any crime of that nature. In the US, it took four months to investigate Madoff and the collapse of his €85 billion Ponzi scheme, a probe that involved 140 interviews and trawling through 3.7 million emails and documents. Less than three months after the investigation ended, Madoff was in jail. This country’s approach to investigating allegations of white-collar and financial crime has been pathetic. I do not say that lightly. I accept everyone is innocent until proven guilty but this spectacle is sending out all the wrong messages to the young, especially, but to all law-abiding people and to those abroad who observe us. Mr. Paul Appleby’s Office of the Director Enforcement, ODCE, is charged with cleaning up corporate Ireland but his office lacks any legal backup — it has no teeth. Most fraud investigations are by their nature, highly complex, and involve the examination of large amounts of documentation requiring input from forensic accountants and the obtaining of legal advice. They are also very expensive. We must ensure that the necessary resources are provided and that the law behind it is strong and that cases once made are watertight. Small business has to contend with NERA, the RSA, HSA and HIQA to mention but a few. Specified serious and complex offences will attract a penalty of at least five years imprisonment, in such areas as banking and finance, company law, money laundering, fraud, corruption and cyber crime. Once it is enacted, the legislation can be used in current investigations in respect of which no prosecution has as yet begun. That is very important. Perhaps we could speed up the legislation to ensure it could be used in such cases. The complexity of the investigations have shown that it is not always possible to complete questioning and check facts in one period of 24 hour detention. It is welcome that detention times can be split up and offer a second or third bite of the cherry. Given that my time is up I thank the Acting Chairman for her forbearance. I hope the Minister will proceed with the Bill as soon as possible.

Deputy Clare Daly: Obviously one will not meet anyone anywhere who will say that he or she is not in favour of white collar crime being tackled, but I do not accept that the legislation will in any way fundamentally alter the situation. I do not believe it will even scratch the surface to deal with the issue and the affront to taxpayers of us and future generations being burdened 700 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage with the crimes of those who operated in our banks and many of the developers among others. If we really wish to deal with the issue then a radically different approach is required than has been adopted to date and a real prioritisation of the issues in terms of the political will to deal with it and the provision of the necessary resources. Even since the election of the new Govern- ment we have been given a graphic example of different approaches or a two-tier country in which we have different approaches to fraud. The Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, has already indicated she will wage war, all guns blazing on the 780,000 claimants of social welfare. She intends to review all of those cases on the basis of their lifestyle and display of wealth to see whether they may be guilty of fraud. When one wants to talk about lifestyle and display of wealth one should really be talking about the individuals to whom Deputy Catherine Murphy alluded, those highlighted in “Prime- time” last night, the likes of Drumm, Dunne and all of the others who are being supported by their wives who never had an independent income prior to what they received from their husbands — serious fraud issues that have been ongoing in this country for decades in many cases and have been proven in many tribunals. Nothing has been done to address them. All of the main parties have been in power when the crimes were perpetrated and the tribunals took place, probably starting with the Goodman tribunal investigating the carousel of cattle being moved back and fro across the Border to avail of EU funds. It was proven to be fraud but, again, nothing was done about it. Mr. Goodman is wealthier now than he was then, although we are told that the practice has ceased, allegedly. I do not accept that the legislation will make a difference at all. We need a different approach. A very good example to highlight the inadequacies of the situation in this country was seen in The Irish Times during the week involving two separate cases. On the one hand there was the case of Raj Rajaratnam, the US hedge fund billionaire, who was found guilty last week of insider trading, of making $63 million on the back of access to secrets. He faces a sentence of 19 and a half years in jail. The same newspaper dealt with a case in this country of DCC, which was lauding its increased profitability. The company was found guilty by the Supreme Court of insider trading on Fyffes shares and a judgment was awarded against it. An investigation was carried out by the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement and a file was sent to the DPP. The response that was sent back contained two words, “No Prosecution”. If we really want to deal with white collar crime then let us examine the role of the DPP. What happened in that case is not good enough. Only recently a pilot scheme has been implemented whereby the DPP will justify his decision to families of people where deaths have occurred. That is unacceptable. The DPP must say why cases are not being prosecuted; in particular when white collar crime is involved, given the impact on society. In all cases the DPP must explain his decisions. There must be more transparency and accountability. The legislation is a joke unless the intentions are backed up with resources. It is not just a case of money or numbers. Fundamentally, it is a case of the State forces having access to the necessary expertise to deal with the issues, because unless they do then they are always going to be in an unequal relationship. The conference of the Association of Garda 6o’clock Sergeants and Inspectors was held last month. Many speakers repeatedly referred to the fact that the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation is, in their own words, “stretched to the limit”. We simply do not have the time to give white collar crime the priority it deserves. We do not have half enough resources. Other people referred to the fact that fraud investigation is non-existent as a result of the shortage of manpower, technology and training. If one compares that with the mobilisation of Garda forces to protect the Queen, it gives a certain indication of where priorities lie. If we are serious about tackling white collar crime, a similar investment must accompany any measures taken in this regard. 701 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Clare Daly.]

Deputy Murphy referred to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, which is similarly understaffed. A staff of 50 is a pathetic number to deal with all the issues facing the office, particularly when a third of that number is tied up with the Anglo Irish Bank investigation. This shows the difficulties faced by the office. It is not just a question of numbers, but also a question of the skills the staff of the office have or do not have. I do not say this to be disrespectful. However, one of the key issues is the mismatch the State has in terms of expert accounting, financial and legal information versus these big corporations which can employ people perfectly skilled at dragging out the process. It is not an equal relationship and the State is always playing catch-up. This legislation does not tip that balance adequately although it may tip it minutely. Take, for example, the order compelling the supplier of material to identify and categorise documentation rather than dump all the information — as happens currently — snowing the investigators under with the volume of information. This order leaves the onus on the supplier of information, whose professional people can find many creative ways to deal with the issues — resources, ordering, time or whatever — to continue to stall the process. One of the issues we need to look at is the role of the professional organisations — the paid experts — be they legal or financial, who have backed up much of what has gone on in this area, the people who like to give advice about semi-State workers’ wages and so on. We saw the Andersen accountancy firm fold as a result of the Enron crisis. We have big accountancy firms here behind much of what is going on, but there is no investigation or regulation of many of the complaints in that regard. There is a difference in approach to different types of fraud in Irish society. Last year, there were 254 prosecutions for social welfare fraud. Some 165 of those people were fined and eight of them ended up in jail. Some 6,681 people in this country went to jail last year for non payment of fines, but nobody served a jail sentence for white collar crime. If we are serious about dealing with these issues, this is the type of issue we must get to grips with.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe: I wish to share my time with Deputy Tom Barry.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Olivia Mitchell): Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe: The Irish people and Mr. Justice Peter Kelly are united in asking why the investigations under way have taken so long and why have we not reached a point where the State has been successfully able to bring a case to court and deliver a prosecution? That is the reason many of the elements of the Bill must be welcomed. Despite the fair points made by Deputy Daly, we must recognise that many of the measures proposed in the Bill will make a difference in moving forward an investigation. The measures are clearly based on the difficulties faced by people investigating some of our organisations, such as Anglo Irish Bank. This Bill is a substantive attempt to recognise those difficulties and deal with them. Some of the proposals and actions prescribed in the Bill, for example, with regard to suspending detention, orders to produce documents or information, documentary evidence and a new clause of withholding information, are important measures which will make a difference towards leading to a successful prosecution of crimes laid out. There is no Member of the Opposition in the Chamber at the moment. For all the apparent concern the Opposition has with regard to the prosecution of crime and the crimes laid out in the Bill, it is noticeable that not a single Opposition Member is present in the House and that Government Members are addressing each other on the matter. For an issue that is of such gigantic public concern, the absence of the Opposition is a telling point. This absence is worth observing because there is little doubt that an essential part of rebuilding our national solidarity 702 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage as a State will be the successful prosecution of the crimes laid out under this Bill, which have played a role in almost collapsing our banking system and which have placed such a huge burden on the shoulders of taxpayers. The Bill focuses on white collar crime. Until recently, this area has been distinguishable by three particular characteristics. First, it is a crime that is tended to be seen as victimless. Second, it is a crime that tends to be highly complicated and third, it is a crime that, until recently, was perpetrated by people who were seen as people of good character. The State has paid a heavy price in learning that these definitions and characteristics of white collar crime can have a decisive effect on the fortunes of our country. We have learned that these crimes are anything but victimless crimes. We know who the victims are. They are the taxpayers who must now deal with the cost of our banking system catastrophe. We have learned they are highly complicated crimes. This characteristic of white collar crime has been reaffirmed by our experience. We have also learned that the people who have committed these crimes have not been people of good character. A mistake that has been made is that we have allowed the deviation and a difference to develop between what is legal and what is moral. Clearly, for too many people, meeting the bare minimum legal requirements was not consistent with acting in a moral fashion. We have learned the great cost of that over the past three years. I wish to make four further points with regard to the Bill. First, I would like to compare the acceleration of legislation in financial regulation as opposed to the Bills that are laid down here which deal with the more judicial aspects of white collar crime. As someone who was involved with some of this legislation in the Seanad, I am struck by the fact that, for example, the Central Bank Reform Act 2010 lays out some strong powers the State has with regard to people performing what is described as “controlled functions” within our banking system, whereby the State will have new power to dismiss and take rapid action against people performing these functions. The Credit Institutions (Stabilisation) Bill 2010 laid out clearly a definition of “systemic risk” with regard to the banking system and created a new role of a “special manager” and granted that individual huge power with regard to banks or financial institutions that were seen as posing a systemic risk to the health of our country. The question I would ask is whether there is a mismatch between the legislation that is being delivered from the financial regulation point of view and the legislation that issues in the judicial area. For example, within the Credit Institutions (Stabilisation) Bill there is a clear definition of systemic risk. Is there a case to be made that even greater powers be granted to people who are trying to deal quickly with cases relating to systemic risk? I would like to hear a response from the Minister on this. The second point relates to areas of the Bill I particularly welcome. I welcome section 15 of the Bill, which relates to documentary evidence. We should recall that when the famous raid was made in February 2009 on Anglo Irish Bank headquarters, some 3.7 million documents were acquired in the process of the raid and the subsequent investigation. The provisions in this Bill with regard to the indexation of documents and how they are provided is clearly a result of the lesson that has been learned from the Anglo Irish Bank investigation. That is particularly welcome. I also strongly welcome section 19 of the Bill, which lays out the details with regard to the withholding of information and why this now becomes a crime. If somebody who is involved in or aware of an investigation taking place does not bring forward information of which he or she is aware, which impedes or slows down the investigation of the Bill, that itself is then prescribed as a crime. While I strongly welcome the overall Bill, sections 15 and 19 appear to make very strong progress in expediting these investigations. The third area I want to emphasise relates to the resourcing of the agencies involved. I know this is an area about which the Minister, Deputy Shatter, is very concerned and one which he questioned in his first days as Minister for Justice and Equality. As we are questioning whether the resources are there, it is worth having the figures for the resources we have. The Office of 703 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Paschal Donohoe.] the Director of Corporate Enforcement spent €3.7 million on corporate enforcement activities covering 425,000 companies, which is expenditure of €9or€10 per company per year. We have a duty to question that. The British Financial Services Authority has a budget of £538 million and is increasing its staff to 3,700 this year. The British Serious Fraud Office has a budget of £51 million. I know our authorities and the Government are committed to do all they can to ensure these agencies are well resourced. This is a question we need to ask continually. I will conclude on the powers available to these agencies. The Competition Authority made an excellent submission to the consultative paper on white collar crime the Department of Justice and Law Reform published last year. It questioned whether it would be possible to extend the investigative powers available to other agencies to give them more teeth. Apparently one of the reasons for the delay in the investigation into Anglo Irish Bank has been the unwill- ingness of one individual for nine months to comply with the investigation agencies, one of which is the ODCE. We need to question again whether the powers are there. I look forward to the Minister’s response. I strongly welcome the Bill. I know the Government is completely committed to dealing with the matter and strengthening the solidarity we have in this area. I note again with huge regret despite what Opposition Members may say in this area; their opposition from the benches today tells a story.

Deputy Tom Barry: I welcome the introduction of the Bill, which coming 60 days into the new Government shows its priorities and honours the commitment in the programme for Government. I agree with the previous speaker that it is unbelievable that the Opposition benches are empty and that only Government Members are speaking. It shows that our priority is to tackle white-collar crime. It should be remembered that Fine Gael-led Governments have a good track record in this area. In 1996 under the stewardship of the then Minister for Justice, Nora Owen, the Criminal Assets Bureau was formed, which has proved to be a major success. It is evident that the Bill has been prepared sadly on the basis of experience. What we have seen in recent years with regards to white-collar crime is despicable. Many people in the banking profession acted with impunity and they seem to have absolutely no fear. The only fear these people may have is the fear of losing their personal freedom. The loss of money, while it might be an inconvenience to many of them, is temporary because money for many of them opened all doors — it even opened political doors. There was a certain acceptance of this loose behaviour with light-touch regulation — in fact one could argue no regulation at all. In some instances a celebrity-type status was conferred on these people. These were rogues and fraud- sters who were being treated as if they were celebrities, which was unbelievable. Their behaviour did not seem to hurt anybody directly or impinge on the citizens as no grievous bodily harm was inflicted. However, unfortunately the consequences of their callous greed are now blatantly obvious in every household and business in the country. It is not a victimless crime. The victims are my generation and the next. It has more victims than we could possibly name and has absolutely destroyed the country. What was enough for these people? When did they have enough? Some people would say they had enough if they had three solid meals a day and a roof over their head, could rear their family and educate them decently, but for these people money was their god and they just never had enough — €1 million or €10 million, one could keep throwing it on but it was just not enough to satisfy their voracious appetite. However, time is up. It is no wonder that the people are disillusioned with what has happened. They feel there have been a lack of accountability and a failure to address these demigods, a failure in accountability and a failure to get these people behind bars. People feel it has taken too long and while this is going on they look at their bank accounts and their circumstances and feel they do not 704 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage have enough on which to live. Every person has been affected by this. However, the Bill sets things straight and is a move in the right direction. Section 7 deals with suspended detention, which is a great idea. It allows those carrying out the investigation to pause and consider. They can go back and check it out, and bring on the investigation. It is obvious that they have been hitting a brick wall up to now and this is a major help to them. Section 3 lists the offences specified by order of the Minister namely:

(a) banking, investment of funds and other financial activities,

(b) company law,

(d) theft and fraud,

(e) bribery and corruption,

(f) competition and consumer protection,

(g) criminal acts involving the use of electronic communication networks and information systems or against such networks or systems or both, or

(h) the raising and collection of taxes and duties,

I have some concerns about the mention of competition and consumer protection. While it is vital to pursue vigorously white collar crime, there may be an overlap with competition law and this is a delicate area. The Schedule refers to: “19. An offence under Regulation 5 or 6 of the Market Abuse (Directive 2003/6/EC) Regulations 2005 (S.I. No. 342 of 2005)” and “29. An offence under section 65 of the Consumer Protection Act 2007.” It is somewhat delicate because I am holding in my hand a copy of a search warrant for the Irish Farmers Association that was used a few days ago with regard to the price fixing of liquid milk in groceries. It is the IFA’s job to represent farmers and it is their right to look for a fair and honest price. Parties will always fight for what they believe is right. We must be cautious and ensure the legislation does not impinge on the right to represent. Section 15(5) sends out a clear message on the withholding of information. It does even more in that it asks that information be presented in a clear, concise fashion. Presenting volumes of material on banking in such a way that makes it almost impossible to organise in a legible and orderly fashion puts the onus on the accused to sort out the documents. Consider the famous electronic passwords. How many Irish people were aghast when passwords were not being released by certain bankers? It beggars belief that people could actually refuse to allow investigators access to passwords but the legislation will deal with this. The legislation specifies that information cannot be encrypted and must be in a readable format. Obviously investigators were given all sorts of mucked-up information to slow them down. The Bill needs to be tied in with the whistleblowers Bill to ensure people who give information honestly are protected and encouraged. Section 16 deals with privileged legal material. The concept of privilege has been used to slow down and frustrate investigations. This is now being dealt with in a proper fashion because experienced people are to be allowed to assist district court judges. A case can be taken in the District Court rather quickly. If it is appealed to the Circuit Court, it will be dealt with within two to four weeks. The legislation will expedite cases rather quickly, which is a blessing in itself. 705 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Tom Barry.]

Evidential presumption comprised another method to slow down investigations. This has been addressed. This Bill is tackling white-collar crime in a serious way. I look forward to the remaining contributions.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív: Cuirim fáilte roimh an Bille seo. Bhí go leor oibre ar bun ag mo chomhghleacaí, Mr. Dermot Ahern, nuair a bhí sé mar Aire, maidir leis an gceist seo. Tá go leor dúshlán ag baint leis an gceist. Cé go bhfáiltím roimh an méid atá sa Bhille seo, nílim cinnte go réiteoidh sé an fhadhb. Go minic, bíonn an dream a bhíonn in aghaidh Bille i gcásanna mar seo eolasach. Bíonn acmhainní acu agus troidfidh siad ina aghaidh go dtí an líne. I welcome the Bill, which is very timely. Work was taking place for some considerable time in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform under the predecessor of the current Minister to determine what could be done to tackle this issue. In welcoming the provisions of the Bill, I still do not believe it will be very easy to secure convictions. This presents a challenge. At meetings all over the country in recent years, people have asked me why we did not lock up the wrongdoers. We need to ensure wrongdoers end up in prison and that this is achieved within the law. I used to try to explain patiently to people that certain rules could not be broken. The first rule is that there must be a judicial process and that one cannot put people in prison unless there is a conviction. One cannot deem somebody guilty because the Govern- ment says so. It is important, notwithstanding the frustration that arises from the patient, proper application of the law, that there be a proper process. The many people who have called for a less- than-proper process are making a mistake that will have long-term consequences. The integrity of the legal system is important. The second rule is perfectly clear but many ordinary people do not grasp it fully. It is that the Government has no role in prosecution. It is in a corrupt state that politicians have an influence in deciding who is convicted of crime and who goes to prison. It is very important that we maintain the separation of powers, which is so central. White-collar crime is very serious and I appreciate that the legal and illegal actions of people — including grossly negligent actions, be they legal or otherwise — have cost people very dearly in the past five to ten years. They have caused great grief, sorrow and difficulties for people. I remember saying that a perfect example of the system getting its person on foot of the commission of a heinous crime is the Guildford and Coventry bombings and what happened subsequently. The authorities getting their men by taking shortcuts with the legal system and the release of those whom they put in prison are the events that are now remembered. It is often forgotten that many people died in those horrendous events and that the perpetrators have never been brought to justice properly. There was no proper conviction. It is important when following a legal process that it be robust and proper and that a proper decision be made at the end that can withstand any subsequent test. There are very good suggestions in the Bill as to how we can address serious abuses. Deputy Barry outlined these very well. He referred to how one can reduce the number of ways in which one can frustrate the system. He referred to passwords. It is absolutely scandalous that they were withheld but it was done nevertheless. With regard to making paperwork very difficult, I understand that in some cases there can be up to 150,000 e-mails. If one does not trawl through them all before trying to secure a prosecution in court, the defence will refer to one that one has not seen in order to try contradict one. The provision of evidence in a usable way and the suspension of detention procedures all make sense. 706 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

I hope the legislation works. It will make the system better but I do not know whether it will address the need of the public for relatively quick prosecution in cases where it is felt there is a very clear prima facie case. Mr. Justice Kelly spoke about having a clear prima facie case that one cannot get into court. I hope the legislation delivers in this regard. It would be very good if it did. People are totally frustrated but I do not underestimate what the Government is up against. Given the nature of the crimes in question and the types of people one is fighting, we must accept that these steps, welcome as they are, might not resolve all our difficulties. Let us consider the nature of white-collar crime. The nature of a violent crime is very visible. If somebody hits another individual and there are witnesses, it is relatively easy to identify who got hit, who did the hitting and that hitting somebody is a crime. In the case of white-collar crime, the first step is to prove the action was illegal. There were many actions in the past five or ten years that were grossly negligent but the question of whether they were illegal is a different issue. It is not illegal to have a company that goes bust as long as one has not traded illegally or recklessly. Therefore, the first step is to establish the legality, or otherwise, of the action. Even if this can be done very simply, one must determine whether one can obtain evidence to prove it in a court of law. It might be commonly perceived or “known” that a thing happened, but one of the huge challenges is whether one can get the evidence to prove it in a court of law. It is not only a case of proving an illegal action took place but my understanding is that sometimes the problem is who knew what, which person it was and if it was the person who is arraigned before the court who was knowingly and willingly guilty of the illegal action. The final issue, and this is probably indicative of the eternal unfairness of life, is that one is fighting people who will hire the best legal experts in the country and will spare no time or expense in fighting the case. One of the interesting and difficult challenges facing a government and state is the fact that in these high-powered cases involving very influential and powerful people one often finds that the resources they can muster to fight the state are much greater than those the state can muster to fight them. The Director of Public Prosecutions or the Director of Corporate Enforcement is trying to deal with many cases at the same time. I heard the Minister discussing this Bill on the radio following its publication. He was asked the obvious question, one which we asked many times of our colleagues when we were in government, as to whether the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement and the Garda Síochána fraud squad had sufficient resources to do the job. The Minister gave the same answer that we had given many times, which is that they do have the resources and they have been told that if they believe they do not have the resources and that the logjam is due to a lack of resources, those resources will be made available. I am glad this Government is following the same policy we followed, although it was probably not recognised as our policy at the time, that resources should not be an impediment to dealing with this issue. No doubt, however, these various offices would also argue that resources is not just a question of bodies but that they need people who know what they are doing, understand the work being done and who can follow it through to bring the matter to a conclusion. Therefore, we face huge challenges. A point I have strongly made for some time is that unless we keep working on this issue, society will be seen to be unfair by those who are least well off. They know that if they are caught shoplifting, they are likely to get a custodial sentence following summary judgment in the district court. It might be somebody who did not get a chance in life or somebody with an addiction issue. They then see the State forever chasing people who are considered by the public, and obviously I cannot prejudge a situation ahead of court proceedings, to be responsible for serious wrongdoing and illegality. The State appears to be incapable of getting such people into court. As long as that injustice exists, there will be people who believe that the law 707 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív.] is less than equal. It might be equal in theory but the reality is that those who have knowledge, background and commit certain types of crime have a much better chance of getting away with it than the perhaps more innocent people who get convictions in our courts. Another matter I feel strongly about, have fought with previous colleagues about and on which I spoke in the context of another Bill before the Dáil is our tendency to think that prison should always be the solution for people who are caught for certain types of crime. A statistic I recall from the time I had responsibility for the RAPID programme has stayed in my mind. It is that half of the prisoners in the jails in Dublin came from six parishes in Dublin. I do not believe that the people in those six parishes were born worse people than anybody else. I do not believe people are intrinsically good or bad by virtue of the parish in which they are born. In examining this issue we must deal with achieving a much greater balance in the perception of the law by the people of this country. I have always believed, particularly in the case of young people, that putting people into prison is as good as putting them into an academy of crime. I welcomed the Criminal Justice (Community Service) (Amendment) Bill. Putting people into community service is a far more practical way of helping them in a positive way than thinking that punishing them by locking them up will solve the problem. This week there was a meeting of the joint policing committee in Galway during which the issue of graffiti was raised. The Garda Síochána told us that it cannot get enough people from the probation service to remove all the graffiti. The Minister, Deputy Shatter, is dealing with overcrowded prisons every day. At the meeting I made the case for opening the doors of the prisons, removing everybody who is there for less than a year and has only six months to serve and making them paint over the graffiti every day. They would be better off, society would be better off and we would be moving in the right direction. One of the big problems one faces in government is what I call “the memo”. Government is very sectionalised, as I am sure the members of the new Government are discovering. When one is outside government one tends to look at matters in a connected way and one tries to have a holistic policy. However, what happens in Government Departments is that one gets a series of memos; they seem to come on a conveyor belt. It many cases the memo has a very narrow focus, which is fine in itself but does not connect to a holistic view of how one solves problems. Therefore, each Department fights its own corner perfectly, and the Department of Justice and Equality, for example, does not want to give up money by letting prisoners out on probation, as it will not have as much money next year. The holistic approach to government is sometimes lacking. I do not blame a particular Government for that, as it has long been the way, but that does not mean I do not believe we should tackle this problem. Céim mhór chun cinn atá sa Bhille seo agus tá go leor inti gur féidir a mholadh. Mar a dúirt mé ar ball, bhí obair ar bun ar an mBille seo i bhfad sular tháinig an tAire Shatter isteach sa Roinn. Guím chuile rath ar an Bhille agus tá súil agam go gcuirfear i bhfeidhm é.Níl aon amhras ach go bhfuil ceisteanna beaga go gcaithfear a scrúdú agus ba cheart iad a scrúdú, ach is Bille é atá práinneach. Mura réiteoidh an Bille seo an fhadhb, tá sé thar a bheith tábhachtach go bhféachann muid an bhfuil aon rud eile gur féidir linn a dhéanamh le déanamh cinnte gur féidir le daoine a dhéanann coireanna den chineál seo a thabhairt os comhair na cúirte chomh sciobtha agus is féidir daoine eile a thabhairt os comhair na cúirte agus nach feicfear go bhfuil deighilt sa phobal idir iad siúd a bhfuil acmhainní acu agus atá ag plé leis an gcineál seo coireanna agus iad siúd nach bhfuil chomh maith as agus a dhéanann rud ar bith atá níos feiceáilí agus níos eásca a dhaoradh i gcúirt. Braitheann gnáth pobal na tíre seo go bhfuil éagóir déanta ag na daoine seo. Braitheann siad go bhfuil éagóir fíor-thromchúiseach déanta orthu ag caimiléireacht ag daoine mórlerá.Tá siad ag cur na ceiste chuile lá faoi cénfáth nach bhfuil na daoine seo tugtha os comhair na 708 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage cúirte. Tuigim dóibh agus tuigim an frustrachas a bhaineann, ó thaobh an phobail de, leis an gceist seo. Mar sin, tá súil agam, nuair a bheidh sé seo ina Acht, go dtiocfaidh sé cuid den bhealach leis an fhadhb seo a réiteach. Tá faitíos an tsaoil orm nach réiteoidh sé an fhadhb uilig de bharr scála na faidhbe, ach fiú máschéad céim é leis na fadbhanna atá ann daoine a chionntú as coireanna den chineál seo, fiú muna bhfuil ann ach an chéad céim, cuirim fáilte roimhe. Tá súil agam, muna n-éireoidh leis seo na torthaí ar mhaith linn a bhaint amach, go dtiocfaimid ar ais agus go dtógfaimid tuilleadh céimeanna le déanamh cinnte go dtabharfar na daoine atá cionntach as coireanna, na bónaí bána mar a thugtar orthu — is sean téarma é“white collar” agus ní chaitheann mórán daoine white collars inniu, ach caitheann mise iad — os comhair na cúirte. Tá sé tábhachtach go bhfeicfear gurb é an córas dlí céanna atá i bhfeidhm dóibh siúd agus atá i gceist do chuile duine eile den phobal.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Ciarán Lynch): The next speaker is Deputy Anne Ferris, who I believe is sharing time with two other Deputies.

Deputy Anne Ferris: That is correct. I welcome the Bill. The Criminal Justice Bill 2011 shows that this Government will stand firm against misconduct by the financial industry. Like the jobs initiative launched only last week, this Bill delivers on another promised priority by the Government to be delivered in the first 100 days of office. I must also welcome the cross-party support it has received, though in the case of Fianna Fáil, its welcome support for the Government’s Bill is a little after the fact. Had Fianna Fáil enacted this Bill in any of the past 14 years in which it was in power, perhaps some of the recklessness of the banks could have been avoided. Let us be clear. The recklessness of the previous Government and the banks with whom they were in bed has seriously hurt this economy. The reverberations of their failed economic policies and the damage they have done are still being felt on a day to day basis by people around the country. The negative effect the bank guarantee had on the state finances cannot be under- estimated. The bank guarantee, which only the Labour Party opposed, has cost the country dearly. There are now thousands of people unemployed, many hundreds of businesses are struggling and many more people at risk of losing their homes. How is that possible when we are supposed to live in a Republic? Billions of euro have had to be poured into a faulty banking system and not enough of those responsible have been held to account. It is certainly something I hope to see remedied in the future. After all, why should the ordinary Irish person take the financial remedies, which are now necessary, when faintly dim, rugby playing bank executives get off scot free? One of these executives in particular, Sean Fitzpatrick, a constituent of mine in County Wicklow — I doubt he voted for me — owes a massive and sincere apology to the taxpayers of this country. From what I understand, while he may be bankrupt, that he has transferred property to family members and attempted to put assets beyond the reach of the state is a major cause of concern. It is for these reasons I welcome the provisions of this Criminal Justice Bill, because the proposed legislation provides the ammunition to tackle these complex financial irregularities. Legislation for white collar crime should have been introduced many years ago. The victims of these crimes are not always readily identifiable as immediately as those who suffer physical injury, but victims they certainly are. It is clear today that the entire State has been subjected to this type of crime. The Bill before the House allows for investigations on banking, financial and company irregularities to be conducted in a manner that allows for greater flexibility and power. The speed of investigations will be also potentially increased significantly by the ability provided by the Bill to tackling the swamping of investigators with documentation. 709 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

[Deputy Anne Ferris.]

Not only do I welcome a Bill that ends the perception of impunity for the white collar criminal, but I also welcome recent plans by the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht to move the bankers in Bank of Ireland from their cosy home in College Green. It is a damning indictment of society that a bank has physical ownership of an Irish Parliament that was originally built to serve the people. When the House of a Parliament becomes the boardroom of a bank, we should know our society is in trouble. It is galling that when many people are losing or on the verge oflosing their homes, that the Bank of Ireland should look to keep its home. This institution thrived on selling people fantastic mortgages and encouraged others to leverage everything they had against uncertain assets. It amazes me, therefore, that it would be allowed keep its comfy home. Many of these bankers actively lied to their shareholders and to their customers. This Bill is important. Those who are involved in financial impropriety ought to be punished and not let off because they feel they occupy some privileged position. On February 25, the people spoke with a voice that toppled a tired and wasted Government, and through this Bill today, one of its lasting legacies of financial corruption properly will be addressed. I commend this Bill to the House because this is a people’s, not a bankers’, republic.

Deputy Anthony Lawlor: I welcome this Bill, which is part of the programme for Govern- ment and which we have delivered within the first 100 days, as promised. White collar crime in some quarters is seen as victimless crime. However, I completely disagree with that because there is always a victim at some stage. While the victim might not be immediately associated with the crime, people will suffer somewhere along the way. While most comments have been associated with the recent economic crash and the effect certain bankers have had on the economy and on our people, there are many other forms of white collar crime, such as insurance fraud, social welfare fraud and so on. In the “Great Crash” of 1929, it was many years before the people whose white collar crimes brought about the crash were prosecuted. One of the major players from the crash was eventually prosecuted in 1938. That is why I am delighted the Minister has indicated that, once enacted, the legislation can be availed of to assist with current investigations as well as future investigations. The key parts of the Bill address the problem of investigators from the Garda Síochána being snowed under with masses of documentation. We can all remember the boxes of files that were taken from Anglo Irish Bank headquarters a couple of years ago. Some files were not released on demand at the time, but this Bill will address that problem. The Bill also allows for investigators to work in a more efficient manner. The smart economy is about dealing with things much more efficiently. The Bill also takes into account the experiences of investigators in their efforts to pursue white collar crime. Practical experience gets practical results. I welcome the fact that the Minister took the time, in his relatively short period in office, to listen to the investigators who are being hindered in their pursuit of white collar criminals. To assist in the implementation of this Bill, it is necessary that we bring forward some whistleblower legislation. This will encourage people to bring forward information on their own companies, so that those who are participating in white collar crime can be quickly brought to court. Those who saw the “Prime Time Investigates” programme on Monday night identified readily with people who could not identify themselves but who gave information to the reporter. As a result of that, we saw that certain individuals in the National Car Testing Service have been let go from their position. These whistleblowers were safeguarded in the programme, which is vitally important. Whistleblower legislation should be enacted to complement the Bill before us. I welcome the Bill tonight and I look forward to supporting it when the time comes. 710 Criminal Justice Bill 18 May 2011. 2011: Second Stage

Deputy Peter Mathews: I thank Deputy Ferris for sharing time with me. I welcome the Criminal Justice Bill 2011. One of its main introductory tenets is that justice delayed is justice denied and that people who carried out wrongdoing are amenable for that wrongdoing. In the past number of days and weeks we have had reminders of how unfair has been the treatment of various persons and parts of society. I recall reading a case in the courts about a year ago of a mother of a couple of children who was not well — she was depressed and on medication, and attending hospital — which was reported by Ms Mary Carolan in The Irish Times. The woman had come before the courts because she had taken out a credit card with a credit card company and had very quickly, because she was unwell with depression, run up her full credit limit. After some legal letters for collection of the amount outstanding, which was under €1,500, which she had ignored because she was not well, she was brought before the courts and convicted, and she was incarcerated in prison. There was at least another solicitor who was not involved in the case who had observed what had happened and knew that a grave injustice had occurred, and who brought an appeal against the sentence. The second judge, in the rehearing of the case, saw that what had happened was absurd. The credit card company had carried out no checks whatsoever on the documentation, which, incidentally, had been filled out by this lady in hospital without proper preparation or regard to any of her circumstances. That improper documentation had led to the uncollectible credit balance, and the non- payment of it. Despite some reminders over a period of months, she ended up in prison and that was wrong. That was a case of the procedures of a credit card company just being used in a mechanistic, irresponsible and negligent way. That sort of negligence travelled up and down through financial institutions over the past number of years, right up to board level and the people who should have been forming professional judgment on the accounts of banks and insurance companies who ignored the principles of prudential accounting. While both sides of balance sheets may have added up and there were no technical arithmetic errors, and neurotic internal rules might have been applied in overview terms, there is a strong case that professional negligence had occurred and by any measure, the result of that negligence has led to the financial pain and destruction being felt by families throughout the economy. The remarks last week of the Master of the High Court, Mr. Edmund Honohan SC, and the remarks of Mr. Justice Peter Kelly about the delays in processing cases in the courts, show that while there is not grievous bodily harm victims or visible destruction of property, for example, by means of fire, there is significant damage in our society. The Bill contains elements that are particularly valuable in this regard. Section 19 brings the responsibility to everybody in financial institutions and in business, and for that matter anywhere, that if there is to his or her knowledge something amiss, something wrong, something that could be criminal, it is his or her duty and responsibility to refer it to the authorities and to ensure that the authorities do something about it, and only reasonable excuses would be allowed in that case. The penalty for ignoring one’s responsibility could be five years in jail or limitless fines. That is good. That is a wake-up call for everybody. There were some other cases in the past few years the results of which were breathtaking, for instance, the insider trading case of DCC, where the Supreme Court on the appeal hearing, after the High Court saw that there was no insider trading, unanimously decided that there was an insider trading case. In delivering the Supreme Court decision, Mr. Justice Fennelly stated, to make it easy for everybody to understand, that insider trading is a fraud on the market. Nobody had any excuse for not understanding what was determined in that case. The Director of Corporate Enforcement, Mr. Appleby, was impelled on that decision to have 711 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Peter Mathews.] conducted an investigation on the company to see if there were grounds for a criminal prosecution or to determine exactly what had occurred and Mr. Bill Shipsey SC produced a report, which took about a year and cost approximately €1.4 million. That report was limp and it merely concluded that there was no further case to be made which is staggering when one considers that the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision had been that a prima facie insider trading case had taken place and that that was a fraud on the market. No wonder the public is bewildered by these sort of outcomes. I, therefore, again, welcome the Criminal Justice Bill because it tightens up the sort of areas where fog and vagueness had reigned. I return to one point on which I touched. Where there has been negligence — no doubt there was because the collapse of the financial system was so considerable that it could only have occurred with wilful negligence and contributory negligence — it begs the question as to what we need to do to address professional poor conduct. That is another area that can be brought in under the microscope or viewfinder because we do not want the law courts to be where one gets lots of law and no justice. They are the called the courts of justice, they are also called the law courts, and in recent times we have a lot more law and very little justice. I would ask all Members of the House on both sides to think about these matters when we are examining the nuts and bolts and technical construction of the legislation in these areas. One point that arose this morning in our discussion took my breath away. There was a question asked as to whether AIB had sought the Government’s views on the request possibly to consider salaries or remuneration to top management at the bank that might breach the €500,000 per annum ceiling.

Debate adjourned.

Private Members’ Business

Dublin and Monaghan Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

The following motion was moved by Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin on Tuesday, 17 May 2011:

That Dáil Éireann, recalling the motion it adopted unanimously on 10 July 2008 which:

— noted “the interim and final reports of the sub-Committee of the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights on the report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin-Monaghan Bombings and the three related Barron Reports, including the Inquiry into the Bombing of Kay’s Tavern, Dundalk, and commends the sub-Committee for its work”;

— urged “the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to allow access by an independent, international judicial figure to all original documents held by the British Government relating to the atrocities that occurred in this jurisdiction and which were inquired into by Judge Barron, for the purposes of assessing said documents with the aim of assisting in the resolution of these crimes”; and

— directed “the Clerk of the Dáil to communicate the text of this Resolution, together with copies of the aforementioned reports, to the House of Commons of the United 712 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with a request that the matter be considered by the House of Commons”;

notes that the question of obtaining access to information held by the British Government on the bombings has been pursued for many years;

requests the Government to continue to raise the matter with the British Government and to press it to comply with the request of Dáil Éireann and reaffirms the support of Members on all sides of this House; and

acknowledges that the cooperation being sought is taking place in the context of transformed relationships on this island and between Ireland and Britain based on mutual respect, on partnership and on friendship.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan: The Independent Members of the Technical Group have not been allowed to sign the motion because we are not members of a political party. However, I think Justice for the Forgotten knows it has our support. I will begin with a quotation, “While these terrible events of 17 May, 1974 endure in the memory of many who witnessed them or were injured by them, I believe it would be invidious to single them out for special official commemoration.” This was the response of the former Taoiseach, Mr. Albert Reynolds, to a question put by the late Independent Deputy Tony Gregory in June 1993, approaching the 20th anniversary of the bombings. In 2004, approaching the 30th anniversary, when speaking on the Barron report, Tony Gregory stated, “We owe it to the families and the memories of those who died to bring closure and finality once and for all to this issue.” He called on the then Government to take the necessary steps to ensure this happened. He supported the group’s preference to pursue an effective human rights investigation into the bombings. As Justice for the Forgotten is now calling on the British Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, to open the files, in 2004 the question was why the then British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, was not co-operating with the request made. Tony Gregory asked whether the reason was the single worst act of terrorism might have been perpetrated by agents of the British Government and carried out in collusion with members of the British security forces. He also noted the reluctance of the then Irish Government and the reticence of all the established political parties to pursue the issue. In 2011, three years from the 40th anniversary of the bombings, enough is enough. The relatives and victims are owed the truth. The Government and the House must lead the way by insisting on the files being handed over. Yesterday I stood on Talbot Street and the grief of the relatives was very obvious, their grief compounded by the injustice of not knowing the truth. A headline in one of today’s newspapers reads, “Queen honours those who died in the fight for Irish freedom”. The innocent lives lost in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings will be honoured only when the truth is told.

Deputy Thomas Pringle: I welcome members of Justice for the Forgotten and their families to the Visitors Gallery. I welcome the opportunity to speak to this important and timely agreed all-party motion which confirms a motion passed in the House on July 10 2008 which was forwarded to the British Parliament for its consideration. It is a disgrace that the British Parliament and the British Government did not see fit to do anything further on the matter. Their inaction shows serious contempt for a neighbouring parliament. To add insult to injury for the families who lost loved ones in these atrocities, the British monarch is visiting the country at the invitation of the President on the anniversary of the bombings at a time when the British Government is 713 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Thomas Pringle.] continuing to maintain its silence and refusing to open the files on the investigation of this crime. I have written twice to the British Prime Minister asking him to open the files as Justice for the Forgotten has requested, but he has not even acknowledged receipt of my letters. This is another small indication of a lack of seriousness they place on obtaining the truth in this case. It makes the words of the British Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, on the publication of the Saville inquiry report ring hollow as he seems to welcome the truth in certain cases only. Last night the Minister only gave half-hearted support to the call made in the motion. It is important to point out that what gives justification to the cause of some who oppose the visit of the Queen and the peace process is the continued refusal of the British Government to answer the very serious charges made in the Barron report and the lingering scent of collusion and British involvement in the State. Let it be, in Mr. Cameron’s own words, that openness and frankness about what happened in the past will make it stronger by doing the right thing now.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett: In recent days there has been much talk, in the context of the Queen’s visit, about new beginnings, putting a seal on past conflict, the need for reconciliation and truth and renewed and improved relations with our British neighbours. All of these sentiments are admirable and ones we all share. In that context, it is obviously very positive that there is an agreed all-party motion calling on the British Government to disclose all of the files and information it has available on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, as well as other cross- Border bombings in the early 1970s. Often there is a long way between word and deed. Cer- tainly, it has been a long struggle for the families of the victims of these terrible atrocities to get to the words calling for full disclosure to allow them to have closure and get to the truth. In that context, it is unconscionable that we are not making more public and forthright demands of the British Government, particularly during the visit of the Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron, to release the files to allow the truth to come out. One must wonder a little about the seriousness and commitment of the British Government. Despite all of the fine and noble sentiments expressed in recent days about the need for reconciliation and to put conflict behind us, it refuses point blank to disclose the information sought by the families. It makes one wonder about its motivation. I implore the Irish Government to move not only by way of words in the form of a motion but also to pursue this issue aggressively in a forthright manner by demanding that the British Government disclose the files to let the truth come out and allow the families closure on this matter.

Deputy Clare Daly: I take the opportunity to add my voice to those of other Deputies in calling on the British state to release the files for independent scrutiny in order that the families involved can get answers to questions that have tormented them for decades about the specu- lated collusion of British state forces in what was, as we all know, the single biggest atrocity in the history of the Troubles. Any of us who attended the wreath-laying memorial service yesterday would have been struck and poignantly felt the suffering still being endured by the families to this day. The issue for the House is what more must we do. This is the second all-party motion that the House will pass, which is welcome and historic. However, that there has to be a second all-party motion on the same issue is unfortunate because the first one should have been acted on and the information furnished before now. That is the call we all have to make strenuously. When this matter was raised in the run-up to the visit of the Queen, the Taoiseach was less than forthcoming in answering or indicating that he would champion this cause with the British Prime Minister. Today and yesterday we heard he would do so. We should wait and see what Mr. Cameron has to state. If it is not enough, the House cannot give up on the issue. This has to be the start of the process. 714 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

Fine Gael and the Labour Party were in power when this atrocity was carried out and the investigation at the time was less than enthusiastic. It was lanced quickly and not thorough enough. As a result, we now have a role to play. Some 37 years later the Fine Gael-Labour Party Government has a chance to repair some of the damage in order that there will not have to be a third all-party motion. This is the start of a much more vocal campaign to get justice and continue the campaign which Justice for the Forgotten and the families affected have carried on for decades.

Deputy Joe Costello: I am sharing time with Deputy Seán Kenny. I am delighted to have an opportunity to speak on this very important issue. I welcome members of Justice for the Forgotten, who are in the Visitors Gallery again this evening and pay tribute to their long and arduous campaign seeking justice in very difficult circumstances. Yesterday Justice for the Forgotten marked the 37th anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings with a wreath-laying ceremony in Talbot Street, the scene of the worst loyalist bombing in Ireland. The same day the Queen of England laid a wreath in the Garden of Remembrance to honour those Irish men and women who died in 1916, rebelling against the Crown. It was a unique moment. The Good Friday Agreement and the growing relationship between Britain and Ireland makes now the ideal time to seek to close the page of grief and pain on the worst atrocities committed on the island of Ireland in recent times. It is time for the Government of the United Kingdom to agree to the repeated requests of this House as expressed today in the words of the Dáil motion “to allow access by an independent, international, judicial figure to all original documents held by the British Government relating to the atrocities that occurred in this jurisdiction and which were inquired into by Judge Barron for the purpose of assessing said documents with the aim of assisting in the solution of those crimes”. I was the Labour Party spokesperson on justice and a member of the joint Oireachtas sub- committee which conducted the public hearings and drew up the reports on Judge Barron’s investigations into the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973, the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974, the bombing of Kay’s Tavern, Dundalk, in 1975 and the murder of Seamus Ludlow in 1976. The testimony and witness of the surviving victims and relatives was the most poignant and compelling part of our deliberations. Few members of the sub-committee were left unmoved by the experience. The sense of loss and pain for their loved ones which they experienced 30 years and more after the tragic events was compounded by the insensitive way that many of them were treated by the agents and agencies of the State and by the total failure of this State and successive Governments to vindicate their rights as citizens under the Constitution. They were truly the forgotten victims. I remember well the early days of the campaign by the appropriately named Justice for the Forgotten. They were treated with the gravest suspicion by the authorities and subjected to close attention and harsh treatment by the Special Branch. They, and those who supported them, were regarded as pariahs and even subversive. For many years the late Tony Gregory and myself were the only public representatives to support the campaign. Now there is full support among public representatives of every political hue in the Oireachtas. It is a rare expression of unanimity and it must be built on. I welcome the fruitful meeting which took place last week between the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, and a delegation from Justice for the Forgotten. I welcome the commitment made in this House yesterday by the Taoiseach and 715 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Joe Costello.] reiterated by the Minister for Justice and Equality that the request for full disclosure of documents would be raised by the Taoiseach with the British Prime Minister, David Cameron. Let us be under no illusion that access to the tens of thousands of documents, which were denied to Judge Barron, will be easy. They contain the most highly sensitive classified information relating to a dirty war which spilled over into the Republic with tragic results. Last month when the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, raised the matter with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Owen Patterson, he was told the British Government was not in a position to accede to the request to disclose the content of the files. Speaking on “Morning Ireland” today, the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, sounded more intent on raising difficulties than exploring ways forward. However, he did not close the door entirely to the relevant files being released by the British Government. In its fourth and final report in 2007 the Joint Oireachtas sub-committee made its most damning finding. It stated:

The Sub-Committee is left in no doubt that collusion between the British security forces and terrorists was behind many if not all of the atrocities that are considered in this report. We are horrified that persons who were employed by the British administration to preserve peace and to protect people were engaged in the creation of violence and the butchering of innocent victims. The Sub-Committee is of the view that given that we are dealing with acts of international terrorism that were colluded in by the British Security Forces the British Government cannot legitimately refuse to co-operate with investigations and attempts to get to the truth.

This is indeed a damning finding and raises the most serious questions for the British Government. In 2001 the Irish and British Governments, meeting at Weston Park, agreed to appoint the distinguished Canadian Judge Peter Cory to conduct an investigation into allegations of collusion by the security forces in six specific cases. These were the murders of solicitors Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson, the killing of Robert Hamill, Billy Wright and Lord Justice and Lady Gibson and Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan. The judge had the power to direct witnesses to attend for interview and the power to compel the delivery of all relevant documentation. Having considered all the confidential documentation, the judge would report to the Government and recommend a public inquiry or other action as appropriate. In effect, the judge recommended a public inquiry into four of the six cases. The Irish Government responded positively and established an inquiry into the two killings which took place along the Border. The Smithwick tribunal of inquiry into the killing of two RUC officers, Breen and Buchanan, is in situ at present. Indeed when the sub-committee was making its final deliberations, members held a conference call with Judge Cory who explained his role under the Weston Park agreement and indicated his willingness to carry out a similar role if requested by the Irish and British Govern- ments in regard to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. There is clearly a model for moving forward and dealing with the undisclosed files. The second part of the motion requests that the Barron report and the text of the Dáil resolution be communicated to the British House of Commons for consideration. It is important that the House of Commons is asked to consider and debate the atrocities which were carried out in the Republic in the 1970s. Three years ago the Barron reports were forwarded to the House of Commons but were never debated there. Many of the British Members of Parliament 716 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed) adopted a hostile and negative attitude to the request and were dismissive of the Barron findings despite the fact the motion had been passed unanimously and referred by the Dáil to the House of Commons. Nevertheless, the findings raise serious questions for the British Government if the British forces in Northern Ireland were engaged in cross-Border acts of aggression, culminating in bombings, shootings and killings, against a friendly country. These issues cannot be ignored. Yesterday in the Dáil, the leader of Sinn Féin, Deputy Gerry Adams, stated that he was prepared to engage in a truth and reconciliation process in regard to the Northern Ireland conflict if an independent and international truth commission was established. This statement is to be welcomed. The Queen’s visit to the Republic of Ireland may at last be the catalyst for bringing about closure to the most recent phase of the tragic history of our two islands allowing all of the people to move on but the Irish and British Governments must act on it.

Deputy Peter Mathews: I commend Deputy Joe Costello on his fine and thoughtful contribution on this topic. Before I say anything else, I welcome the families of Justice for the Forgotten, who are in the Visitors Gallery listening to this debate. On 17 May 1974, I was working on the tenth floor of Fitzwilton House beside Leeson Street Bridge on the canal. I saw the explosion take place at South Leinster Street. It took place outside 10 and 11 South Leinster Street — that I knew because my Dad worked there. Luckily, from my own narrow point of view, he was abroad on business at the time and most of the staff in the office building had left because in the insurance business, offices generally closed to the public at approximately 5 p.m. and there were only a few people in the building. However, one person was sucked down by the vacuum caused by the explosion out on the street and broke a leg. Luckily, nobody else was hurt. It was a very chilling and frightening evening and night in Dublin. I was 23 years of age at the time and was very shaken and frightened, even though I had not been nearby. To have seen the cloud of smoke in the distance and to know other explosions had taken place was quite terrifying, even not being there. I feel a great empathy and sympathy towards the families, particularly for what Deputy Costello described very well as a very long, empty odyssey without knowing what lay behind it. We must reflect on the sadness that occurred for those families and the anxiety of not knowing why it happened and how. Wisdom teaches us also not to lose sight of what is expressed in the Private Members’ motion, which recalls the motion adopted unanimously on 10 July 2008 and:

notes that the question of obtaining access to information held by the British Government on the bombings has been pursued for many years;

That is the basis and foundation of hope and it is core and central. Deputy Gerry Adams referred to the possibility of truth and reconciliation. That is worthy of our reflection and our seeking to bring it about. On a vox pop on television recently, a woman said that her mother 717 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Peter Mathews.] had taught the family that there is no future in the past. We can learn from the past but we must build on the future. We live in the present and English is the only language I know that has the dual dimension of the term “present”, meaning now, in the present moment, and the gift. We speak about birthday presents and Christmas presents. The present is where we live, it is the gift and in that context a gift is something to be respected and cherished with care.

Deputy Seán Conlan: I welcome this motion and the actions of the Taoiseach in raising this matter with the British Prime Minister, David Cameron. Mr. Cameron should use this opportunity to release all the original files. It is essential for the victims and families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and other atrocities that the full truth emerges about these crimes, including who carried them out and under whose orders they were carried out. Access to this information is long overdue. The families of the victims have waited patiently for over 37 years for answers to these questions. It is three years since the motion last came before the House. Only when we find out the full truth can closure for the families of the victims be achieved.

Deputy Seán Kenny: I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and to support the all-party motion. I also welcome the commitment by the Taoiseach to raise the issue of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings with British Prime Minister David Cameron on behalf of Justice for the Forgotten when the British Prime Minister visits Dublin. I welcome the families of Justice for the Forgotten to the House. We cannot forget that 34 people, including an unborn child, were killed on 17 May 1974. This was the greatest loss of life on a single day in the history of the Troubles on this island. The bombing on Talbot Street is commemorated by a monument erected near the junction of Talbot Street and Amiens Street to honour the memory of those killed on that day. Like previous speakers, the bombing on Talbot Street has a particular relevance for me. The atrocity happened close to where I worked. The bombing occurred at 6 p.m. I heard the sound of the explosion on my way home from work. I used to finish 15 minutes earlier on Fridays and if the explosion happened on another weekday, I could have been in Talbot Street at the time. All of the people killed on that day were ordinary people going about their daily business when the terrorist atrocity was executed. One of the people killed in Talbot Street that day was a man who sold newspapers near the junction of Talbot Street and Gardiner Street. I used to buy an evening newspaper from him on my way home from work. I was struck by the similarities between the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in 1974 and the Canary Wharf bombing in 1996. Both were barbaric acts of urban terrorism, committed by different sets of ruthless people who had no qualms about killing innocent people. One of the people killed at Canary Wharf was also a street newspaper vendor. The rest were going about their daily business. Since the times of these atrocities, we have had the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process, which has transformed relationships on this island and between Ireland and Britain, which are based on mutual respect. My colleague, Deputy Joe Costello, stated that Justice for the Forgotten marked the 30th anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings yesterday with a wreath laying ceremony in Talbot Street. On the same day, we had the start of the historic visit of a British monarch to an independent Ireland. The vast majority of the citizens of the State welcome Queen Elizab- eth as a visitor to our State in a spirit of friendship and reconciliation. I particularly welcome her tour of Croke Park this afternoon, during which she met players and groups associated with the GAA. The GAA President, Christy Cooney, spoke for everyone when he said the Queen’s visit would result in a further advancement of the Northern Ireland peace process. 718 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

It is relevant to refer to the funeral of the slain PSNI constable and GAA player, Ronan Kerr. His funeral cortege was evidence of a new reality in Northern Ireland. Many people are of the opinion that the visit of Queen Elizabeth could have happened ten years ago, as the conditions were favourable for such a visit since the majority of the people of this island voted in favour of the Good Friday Agreement. Perhaps the delay was down to the caution and conservatism of the previous Taoiseach. I deplore the rioting in Dorset Street and the surrounding area. We are told hundreds of rioters clashed with gardaí for almost three hours in the city centre area, throwing fireworks, glass bottles and bricks. A Bus Éireann bus and cars were hit by bricks and wheelie bins were set on fire. Paramedics on duty in the area had to wear helmets for their protection and safety. This behaviour is unacceptable and does not serve any purpose. The Garda Síochána is to be congratulated on its efforts and forbearance in dealing with the situation. It is clear that many families with relatives killed during the Troubles have questions they want answered. Dealing with the legacy of the past is not easy because there is no simple solution or quick fix but it is a challenge we must accept.

Deputy Joe O’Reilly: This debate takes place in a significant week in history of Anglo-Irish relations. The visit of the Queen to this country this week is of enormous significance and it is a major part of the process of reconciliation between our countries and peoples and the people of this island. That is of extraordinary significance. It is a crucial phase of a very important process. It gives a real expression to the Anglo-Irish Agreement. It would be naı¨ve to assume this is the end of the process or that we do not have more to do. Nevertheless, it is an enormous milestone on the road. Among the major remaining issues is that which was aptly addressed in an all-party motion — the three bombs which went off in 1974 in Dublin and, 90 minutes after, the bomb in Monaghan town. Some 33 people lost their lives in that incident, with 100 injured. Seven of those people were from Monaghan. In July 2008 the Dáil unanimously urged the British Government to allow access to documents concerning the incident or any information it had. The Tánaiste recently raised this issue with the British authorities and the Taoiseach is raising the matter with British Prime Minister Cameron today. I put on record the desirability of both those interventions and that the Taoiseach is giving the issue priority today is in many ways an adequate answer to this motion. It is at least an important part of the answer and the response of Prime Minister Cameron will be very significant. The Dublin and Monaghan bombings have not yet been adequately dealt with but they should be for the sake of the relatives. The pain and suffering remains and it is real for the relatives up to the present. We should address that issue. It is important for Prime Minister Cameron to respond positively to the Taoiseach and indicate the information will be laid out and dealt with. Prime Minister Cameron showed great leadership and vision in publicly apolo- gising after the publication of the Saville report on the Bloody Sunday atrocity. It was a cour- ageous, worthwhile and very important healing step, and a similar gesture on his part with regard to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings would be of enormous significance and importance. It is a necessary part of the process. Archbishop Eames has made important points on the need for a forum of reconciliation to deal with the angst, hurt and pain on all sides of this equation. Some 3,600 people lost their lives throughout the period in question, which makes it critical that a healing process come about. The South African model has clearly worked in that context but there are other possi- bilities. We must look for a forum in which this can happen and it will be necessary for all sides to engage in it. Relatives require closure in order to ameliorate their pain. It is necessary to release the documents because of this and there should be full disclosure in that regard. 719 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Joe O’Reilly.]

There have been a number of other atrocities and events in the Republic of Ireland which should be put on the record of this debate. In 1972 there was a bombing at Burgh Quay, where there were 40 injuries; on 1 December 1972 there were two car bombs in Dublin, which killed two people and injured 131; and in 1975 there were 14 injuries and one fatality in another incident. There was also a bombing in Belturbet and near Pettigo. As a representative and native of County Cavan, I make reference to the deaths of Geraldine O’Reilly and Patrick Stanley. The people involved need closure but there has been no closure on the Belturbet bombings either for the two teenagers who lost their lives. We need that closure. The efforts of the Taoiseach with Prime Minister Cameron will be highly significant, as is this motion. The visit of Queen Elizabeth II is a declaration of good intent and is an enormous step on her part and in the process of reconciliation. The ultimate tribute we can pay to the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, as well as those of Belturbet, Pettigo and everywhere there has been violence and death, is to work daily and every hour that we can to build the peace process and reconciliation within our communities. In particular, we must work to end sectarianism with every opportunity that is presented. We must build a spirit of community and an infrastructure of peace. That will involve investment in certain areas and positive discrimination towards certain communities and areas. It will also involve many gestures. We all have a responsibility to build the peace, reconciliation and bridges between people. We must facilitate exchanges of peoples across borders and seas, as well as a regular interaction to build a peaceful society in future. There is no greater way to commemorate the victims of violence than that. We require disclosure by the British Government on the issue and that will be key to the continuous building of the peace process. There should be no avoiding the subject. This call will be carried forward by the Taoiseach’s meeting with Prime Minister Cameron and there will be subsequent diplomatic activity to achieve an outcome. This is the minimum required by relatives. They need a level of disclosure and truth. Allegations around collusion existed right up to the present and it is important that there be open disclosure on this and related issues. Relatives need such a process at a minimum but will also need to see a sense of recognition of their pain, a truthfulness regarding what has happened and the need to be part of a reconciliat- ory process. Ultimately, relatives want to see justice but the degree to which that can be practi- cally achieved in the context of the time lag and related matters is unclear. In so far as justice can be seen to be achieved, it should come about. Relatives deserve, at a minimum, apologies and a process of involvement, they are a pre- requisite. Those families which remain in suffering need that level of closure. It would be a great outcome from tonight’s unanimous motion if there is a further step in that direction. Rather than cursing the darkness it is sometimes important to light a candle. Equally, we should recognise a half-full glass rather than one which is half empty. It might be no harm to recognise tonight that we have come on an enormous journey and achieved a significant amount. We have come a long way in the peace process and there are not many stumbling blocks remaining. This is one but there are only a few more to be scaled in order to rebuild a peace in which we can talk about these events as a distant history.

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: I will take ten minutes and propose to share ten minutes with Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh, and five minutes each with Deputies Seán Crowe and Martin Ferris.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Is that agreed? Agreed. 720 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: I welcome the commitment made yesterday by an Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, arising from the tabling of this motion and the questions from us and others, that he will raise this matter directly with the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, when he meets with him today. I look forward to the Taoiseach reporting back to the Dáil on what the British Prime Minister has to say in response. The motion before us, which was proposed by Sinn Féin and unanimously endorsed by the House, reinforces the motion passed in July 2008 and thus gives him a full mandate to ask the British Government to do the right thing. It has been repeatedly been asked to do the right thing but has failed to do so. The British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, was reported in the media as citing the supposed legal obstacles and constraints the European Court of Human Rights presents to releasing these files. We do not accept this argument and we expect that Taoiseach will reject the attempt at further procrastination. The Dublin and Monaghan bombings in 1974, with their devastating impact, were preceded and succeeded by incidents in which the British state played a direct role in co-ordinating loyalist paramilitaries in the murder of Irish citizens. I will focus on an incident that occurred 20 years ago next Wednesday, 25 May, namely, the assassination of Eddie Fullerton, a Sinn Féin councillor, in my hometown of Buncrana. Eddie Fullerton was an elected representative on Buncrana Town Council and Donegal County Council. It is clear when one examines the circumstances of Eddie’s assassination that the British state, because it got away in 1974 with co-ordinating the deeds of loyalist paramilitaries who acted in cahoots with British military intelligence, continued to act in this fashion throughout the shoot-to-kill era and the collusion of the late 1980s and early 1990s, when Sinn Féin councillors and members, human rights lawyers, GAA officials and innocent civilians were murdered as part of a systematic campaign. Before that, British military intelligence armed these paramilitaries to the teeth with weapons from South Africa through their conduit, Brian Nelson. It is an horrific story. One Deputy, who has since left the Chamber, referred to the actions of Irish republicans in the conflict. The difference is that Irish republicans have accepted responsibility for their role in the conflict and have apologised to innocent victims. The British state has never done that. It has never been open or honest about its role in the conflict, whether direct or indirect. In particular, the withholding of its files denies justice to the families of the victims in Dublin and Monaghan on that day in 1974. I raise the case of Eddie Fullerton not to distract from the focus of this motion but to embolden and strengthen the families by pointing out that the failure of our Government to hold the British Government to account allowed the continued killing of people in this State. Eddie Fullerton lived in a cul-de-sac in Cockhill Park, a small council estate located one mile from Buncrana town. The amount of intelligence required in that assassination or murder was considerable and could not have been collected solely by loyalist paramilitaries. The killers were able to take over a house located one mile from Eddie’s home, kidnap the daughter of the family and use the family car and a sledge-hammer belonging to the man of the house to carry out their operation. A second car monitored Eddie’s house and when he returned home, two different cars were parked nearby. They knew enough to come around the back of gardens and to use the sledge-hammer on his front door. More importantly, they were familiar with the complex layout of Eddie’s house, which had a number of extensions. They made their way immediately to Eddie’s door. Eddie fought them at the door and tried to defend his wife but was murdered in a calculated and systematic fashion. The people involved clearly had the benefit of considerable intelligence and military experience. This means the British state, probably directed from No. 10 through its intelligence services, ordered the assassination of an elected representative of the people of County Donegal in this Twenty-six Counties State. 721 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn.]

The weapons used to kill the nine victims of the 1993 Greysteel massacre and the four workers at Castlerock where revealed by ballistic evidence to have been used in Eddie’s killing. That evidence was already available in 1993 but, incredibly, the Garda did not think it necessary to question the people charged and convicted for those murders. This evidence was discovered by Eddie’s immediate family. For the past 20 years, an entire generation of his family has had to campaign for justice when the facts are staring us in the face. I could say more about this case because it emboldens the families of the Dublin and Monaghan victims. Their experience was visited on others over the past 37 years because our Government failed to hold the British Government to account. If it can get away with the murder of so many people, clearly it will not give a thought to the murder of a public representative. Irish republicans are part of a positive dynamic. Across this island, 400,000 people support our party and we are moving forward with confidence towards the achievement of a united Ireland. We have stood up to our responsibilities as Irish republicans and we are building relationships. The British state has not done the same and that is our key contention when its Head of State, the Queen of England, comes here on the anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the week before the 20th anniversary of Eddie’s killing. It is long overdue that the British state, in the guise of either its Queen or its Prime Minister, accepted responsibility for its role in this conflict and its indirect or direct contribution to the deaths of hundreds of Irish people. Let nobody lecture Irish republicans on moving on and not looking back. Those who lecture us never met their responsibilities. They abandoned the families of their own citizens and elected representatives. These families had to become the investigating body on behalf of the Irish people. That is the biggest disservice to the families who are in the Gallery and the relatives of Eddie Fullerton and others. They have had to do the job of the Garda in the absence of an investigation. That is a damning indictment of the Twenty-six Counties State and successive Governments. They should not lecture us when they failed to meet their responsibilities to their own citizens. When the Taoiseach meets David Cameron and gets over the diplomatic niceties, he needs to represent the collective voice of the 166 Members of this House and of the Irish people by telling the British Government to accept its responsibility for arming loyalists to the teeth and directing them to the homes of victims, and for the direct involvement of its forces in those murders. It must take responsibility for the part it played in the conflict. Irish republicans have stepped up to the plate and it is time for others to do likewise. That is what moving forward is about. That is maturity, that is a state which deals with the legacy of conflict.

Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh: Is cuimhin liom, ainneoin go raibh méóg go leor, lá na buamála. Bhí mé thuas i sléibhte Bhaile Átha Cliath ag an am ag baint móna le mo chlann agus bhí a fhios againn, nuair a chualamar an glór go soiléir, go raibh rud éigin truamhéalach tar éis tarlú. Blianta ina dhiaidh sin, is beag nár gortaíodh mé féin go dona i bpléascadh a rinne buíon mharfach Shasanach i mBaile Átha Cliath. Tháinig mise slán, ach i gcás na n-ionsaithe átáá phlé againn faoi láthair, níor tháinig gach duine slán. Maraíodh agus gortaíodh scóranna sibhial- tach ar na laethanta difriúla atáá phlé againn agus a bhíá phlé ag na tuairiscí abhí ag lorg na fírinne faoi cad go díreach a tharla. Nílanfhírinne sin tagtha chun solais go fóill. This motion is ultimately about truth recovery and I welcome the fact that all parties came on board on Monday to support it. The motion demonstrates the value we all place on truth and justice. The victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings are not alone in their quest for the truth. There have many been other travesties where justice was denied, including the attempt at mass slaughter at the Widow Scallans pub which left a truly brave IRA volunteer, Martin 722 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

Doherty, dead after he tackled a British-directed death squad on that occasion. I ask the Taoiseach and Tánaiste to make themselves aware of the facts surrounding the execution by British paratroopers of 11 civilians in a two-day period in Ballymurphy in August 1971 prior to those paratroopers moving on to Derry where they gunned down another 14 civilians in January 1972. The apology from the British Premier, David Cameron, last year for the slaughter of civilians in Derry was extracted from the British Government after 30 years, but as yet no apology has been forthcoming — no truth has been forthcoming — for the many other killings of civilians and non-combatants by British soldiers, RUC officers or their pseudo gangs and proxy killers, which were carried out across this island. It was an official political policy by the British Government for generations to establish, equip and direct pseudo gangs to do their bidding. An integral part of that strategy was to target opponents, insurgents and their supporters and to strike terror in the supposed host community. It was aimed at discrediting opponents, causing chaos, diverting blame, confusing the issues and muddying the waters. It was what is described in the media today as international terrorism. This pseudo gang strategy was implemented in Ireland, North and South, by the British army in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. General Frank Kitson, who refined this centuries old colonial and imperialist strategy in Kenya not long before he arrived in Ireland in the early 1970s, went on to become aide-de-camp general to the Queen in the early 1980s. He was granted a CBE for his role in Ireland. So much for the Queen being above the actions of her army. The actions of the UDA, UVF, the Littlejohns and many others on the orders of their shadowy military directors, whether the SAS, MI5, MI6, MRF, Tara, Ulster Resistance, LVF or other flags of convenience, have never been fully probed, except by a few brave souls. Some brave citizens have lost their lives for daring to expose Britain’s dirty war in Ireland, solicitors Rosemary Nelson and Pat Finucane among them. There have also been those within this State who have colluded or facilitated the British war machine in Ireland, particularly since 1969. Some have been agents of the Crown, including some gardaí; some have been dupes; others were cheerleaders for the British war in Ireland. Most were ignorant or did not want to know the truth or care to find out the truth, even it they could in the era of censorship. In that context I place on record our utter rejection of the remarks of Deputy Robert Dowds in the debate in this House last night. Deputy Dowds stated: “In many respects, the Dublin and Monaghan bombings were a response to the deadly activities of Sinn Féin and the IRA in the 1970s”. I utterly reject that claim. It parrots the argument of the perpetrators of the bombings, and Deputy Dowds should withdraw it. At the time of the bombings Sinn Féin was still banned in the Six Counties. Internment without trial was ongoing. If the Deputy cares to examine the history of the conflict he will see clearly the central role of Unionist paramilitaries. The bombings took place in the context of the Unionist campaign against the Sunningdale Executive. Deputy Dowds is harking back to the Fine Gael-Labour Government of the day which tried to blame republicans for the bombings. He obviously hankers back to the regime of Conor Cruise O’Brien, Paddy Donegan and Liam Cosgrave, ably assisted by civil servants such as Peter Berry. Whose agenda were they following? Who was pulling their strings? I am reminded of the statement by a Minister for Justice of a later era, Nora Owen of Fine Gael, in May 1995 in regard to the inquiry into the Dublin bombings: “The Commissioner is satisfied that the matter has been taken as far as it could go and that no useful purpose could be served by any further inquiries.” We have moved on from Nora Owen’s time. 723 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh.]

I salute all those who stood up to the anti-republican agenda of the establishment in this State at that time and who braved the wrath of the Ministers and their servants. My own father was threatened with being put out of his job in the National Museum for daring to speak at a commemorative lecture on 1916. In fact he was doing his job. McCarthyism was alive and well in the 1970s and 1980s in this State, and the witch hunt against republicans in that era contributed nothing to a solution to the conflict. Instead it probably prolonged it. I hope we have now reached an era of respect which deals with the legacy of the past in an open and frank manner, but I urge, with that in mind, that the Government not proceed with the Tribunals of Inquiry Bill 2005 which was published by the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell. It would have grave consequences for truth recovery, particularly in cases of suspected State collusion. Nobody can deny we are in need of new legislation to govern the work of tribunals, especially to reduce costs, but that legislation could be used by future Governments to prevent public inquiries from delivering the truth to the public and to the families of victims of collusion. It is along the lines of the British Inquiries Act, on which it was based, which was introduced to prevent a full public inquiry into the murder of human rights solicitor Pat Finucane. The Government cannot sign an all-party motion aimed at forcing Britain to reveal the truth and then proceed with legislation which would undermine our demand by giving itself a significant power to cover up such events. The relatives and those representing victims of collusion have long sought full, independent and public inquiries. We must work together to ensure no legislation is introduced that would jeopardise and compromise the independence of future inquiries. I take this opportunity to salute Justice for the Forgotten, the Pat Finucane Centre and Relatives for Justice for their trojan work over the years in exposing the truth. I wish them well in the future. I hope the families will receive the files from the British Government and learn the full truth of the horrific background to the bombings in Dublin and Monaghan. I urge the Government to restore funding for Justice for the Forgotten to the level it was before the Fianna Fáil Government slashed it and ask that this funding be retained until its work is complete.

Deputy Seán Crowe: Tonight’s motion comes against a backdrop where the families, survivors and friends of Justice for the Forgotten are hoping that a positive signal will come from a banquet in Dublin Castle and that the files relating to their loved ones will finally be released. Last night in this House a speaker from the Labour Party said he believed the bombs detonated in this city and elsewhere in 1974 were in direct response to the IRA. A relative of one of the victims of the bombing in McGurk’s Bar in Belfast sat angrily listening to that speech. His family were also told by the British and RUC that the IRA were directly responsible for killing his loved one. The false accusations were then used as a propaganda tool against republicans and no investigation was carried out into that atrocity. We now know that loyalists planted that bomb. We also know that, in the 1970s, loyalists did not have the capability or know-how to construct bombs of the type which caused such devastation on the streets of Dublin and Monaghan. We now know that loyalist counter-insurgency gangs were established, armed and directed to targets by elements of the 8o’clock British security set-up. We now know that checkpoints were removed and they were given free passage. We now know that guns and explosives were brought into Ireland by British agents and given to loyalist organisations. We now know that very little happened within loyalist circles of which the British were not aware. Many innocent people 724 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed) with no connection whatsoever to republicanism were killed at the behest of successive British Governments and their securocrats. I have no doubt that elements of the British security establishment, in conjunction with their political masters, were involved in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. This State and its political leadership, I suspect, came to the same conclusion. That is the appalling vista behind the closing down of the inquiry into those bombings. I am old enough to remember what happened in the late 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. I remember going into town after one of the bombings to see, in my frustration and helplessness, if there was anything at all I could do to help. Events and experiences such as these shaped my politics. I know that war in all its ugly manifestations destroyed tens of thousands of people’s lives. Terrible events happened throughout that period and people are still trying to deal with loss all over these Islands. Why my son, my daughter, my loved one? I cannot change the past but I have worked with others to try to bring about a better and more peaceful future. Irish Governments have adopted a “hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” attitude to the activities of Unionist paramilitaries in this State and the direct collusion in such activity by Britain. More than 50 people have been killed in this State by Unionist paramilitaries since the early 1970s, and not a single individual has been held accountable. The European Convention on Human Rights states that all deaths must be investigated. The fes- tering scandal of collusion will not go away and attempts to cover it up or limit the scope of inquiries only serve to confirm its existence. Both Governments must confront these legacy issues and work towards full disclosure. It is to be hoped tonight is a new beginning and the families of the forgotten will see some closure.

Deputy Martin Ferris: It is important when dealing with the unresolved issues around bombings in this State to bear in mind the context in which they took place. In particular, it can be seen the extent to which the conflict in the North, which obviously then had a massive impact on this side of the Border, was driven by the British state and elements under its control. We are all aware of the reaction to the civil rights movement, which the Unionists, along with loyalists, attempted to destroy through force and repression. That led to the introduction of internment and culminated in the events of Bloody Sunday in January 1972. There were other instances of force being used in an attempt to make Nationalists in the Six Counties lie down. It is clear from what we know of the activities of the British forces in Ireland at the time, through the revelations of Fred Holroyd, Colin Wallace and others, that they were pursuing the type of counter-insurgency campaign in which they had been involved in other conflicts where British colonial authority had been challenged. That strategy led to a litany of events directly involving members of the British forces and pseudo gangs under their control, the Miami Showband killings being just one of those incidents. British strategy at the time also motivated them to become directly involved in this State both through its intelligence agencies and through individuals who have been referred to such as the Littlejohns. That intervention reached into the ranks of Garda Special Branch, although we are still not fully aware of how high that went. We know that the intelligence ring controlled by Wyman had access to top level intelligence from within the Special Branch and that intelligence was used among other purposes to organise some of the activities engaged in by the Littlejohns. In Dublin, £67,000 was taken in an armed raid of which they were subsequently convicted. The object of all that was clearly to influence the framing of policy in this State and the bombings of December 1972 were successful in achieving that aim. As anyone familiar with the history of that period will know, the explosions that led to fatalities in Sackville Place coincided with a debate in this House on the proposed new Offences Against the State Bill. It had appeared that the legislation would be defeated until news of the bombing led Fine Gael 725 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Martin Ferris.] to change its stance and the party’s abstention in the vote allowed the Bill to pass. If my recollection is correct, Liam Cosgrave crossed the floor of the House to vote with the Government. The intent of those who had organised the bombing had been realised. If, as many suspect, British intelligence was directly involved in planning the bombing, it marks an unbelievable interference in the workings of another state. Suspicions of that involvement were there from the beginning and the then Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, outlined his view in August 1973 that the British services had been involved. What he neglected to mention but was forced to later was that he also knew of the fact that the Littlejohns and others had been working for British intelligence within the jurisdiction. Evidence of that emerged soon after the Dublin bombings of December 1972 when John Wyman, an MI6 officer, and his contact within the Special Branch, Patrick Crinnion, were arrested. Crinnion was found to be in possession of confidential documents. While this might have led to the exposure of the entire spy network, the hearings were held in camera, however, and a deal was made which resulted in Crinnion and Wyman being handed over to the British in return for the extradition here of the two Littlejohns. It would be naive, however, to believe that this marked an end to British intelligence activities of that nature within the State. The bombings of 1974 strongly point to connections between those responsible and the British services and no doubt there continued to be infiltration and intervention in many other aspects of life in this State. That is why it is important, as others have called for during this debate, that we establish a full commission of inquiry to examine all the remaining questions regarding the involvement of the British intelligence services in events such as the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. That should be conducted in a spirit of seeking the truth and bringing some solace to the relatives of victims rather than to score political or historical points. That has been the attitude of the republican movement in its dealing with events in the past. Such an inquiry would require the handing over of files related to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and other events, which the Taoiseach indicated yesterday he would request during his meeting with David Cameron. I also hope any documentary or oral evidence that exists in this jurisdiction relating to these matters will be made available.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes): Yesterday, as we debated this motion, relatives of those who were killed and injured in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings sat in the Distinguished Visitors Gallery. I am sure that for them each 17 May is a stark reminder of their loss, and for those who were injured it brings back painful memories. However, I am sure that they have many other days when they recall their loss, when they mourn the absent person at a special family event. As elected representatives of this House, we had the opportunity yesterday and again this evening to show that we are conscious of their loss, that we remember their pain and that all parties represented in this House agreed to send a strong and clear signal to our counterparts in Westminster that the issue of access to files remains to be addressed. I welcome the fact that this is an all-party motion and that there is no contention in this House on the issue. The Tánaiste met with a delegation from the Justice for the Forgotten group last week and told them that he had raised the issue with the Secretary of State, Mr. Owen Paterson, and with the Foreign Secretary, Mr. William Hague. As we heard from Foreign Secretary Hague this morning, his Government is happy to discuss this issue. At the Tánaiste’s meeting with the Justice for the Forgotten group, the pain that relatives still feel was evident but so too was their quiet and determined dignity. Their need for answers about what happened to their loved ones was also evident. They said that they could not get those answers on their own. They are 726 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed) right in saying that. Yesterday and today, this House has had the opportunity to show them that they are not on their own. As a Government, we told them we want to help in any way we can and to support their ongoing efforts. I can confirm to the House tonight that the Taoiseach has met with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron, in Dublin this evening and has raised this specific matter with him in the course of his discussions. Yesterday, families gathered to remember those who were killed and injured in Dublin and Monaghan in 1974 but also those who were killed in the bombings in Dublin in 1972 and 1973. Speakers in the House yesterday recalled the bombings in Clones, Pettigo and Belturbet. In the course of the violent decades that affected our island and our neighbouring island, more than 3,600 people lost their lives. Many thousands more were injured. Several speakers in the debate last evening recalled that there were victims from all parts of the community. Many speakers yesterday and today have spoken about the legacy of the troubled history of the people who share this island and those in the neighbouring island. Too many families across these islands mourn the loss of a loved one. Too many bear the physical and emotional scars of the conflict that blighted these islands from criminal terrorist groups for far too long. Speakers yesterday recalled that we need to find a way forward which treats all victims equally. There are many different ways of developing this issue. That has been the case in many parts of the world where different formulas have been found. The Government commits itself to working with the British Government and with our colleagues in the Northern Ireland Assembly to address this legacy. In the Good Friday Agree- ment the participants “recognised that victims have a right to remember as well as to contribute to a changed society”. The visit by the Head of State of our nearest neighbour is a sign of that changed society. In debating this motion, this House recognises that, in addition to the responsibility we all have to the future, we have a duty to remember. Yesterday, on the streets of Dublin we saw violent and destructive conduct displayed by a small group of people who would seek to drag our country back to the dark days of violence that blighted this city and this island for far too long. As elected representatives of the Oireachtas we can reaffirm that we do not wish any other family to suffer that loss. We can remind those who might seek to go back to that dark time that the overwhelming majority of the electorate throughout this island continue to reject that path. As we move forward to a better future for all who live on this island, let us ensure that as we seek the truth for the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings we also address the wider legacy of the past. Let us recommit ourselves in agreeing this all-party motion this evening to making sure that the legacy we leave the next generation is not one of conflict, but one of a shared and brighter future.

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: I wish to share time with Deputy Gerry Adams.

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

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien: Thirty seven years ago, 34 people in this State had their lives cut short by loyalist death squads containing members of the Ulster Defence Regiment. The Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 17 May 1974 resulted in the highest number of casualties in any single day during the conflict. A loyalist paramilitary group, the Ulster Volunteer Force, whose ban had been lifted the previous month by Merlyn Rees, the Labour Secretary of State, subsequently claimed responsibility for the bombings in 1993. No warnings were given before the bombs exploded. Three bombs exploded in Dublin during rush hour killing 26 people and an unborn child and one exploded in Monaghan 90 minutes later killing seven people. No one has 727 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed)

[Deputy Jonathan O’Brien.] ever been charged with those attacks, which have been described by an Oireachtas committee on justice as an act of international terrorism. There are many unanswered questions as to how loyalist paramilitary death squads acquired the capacity to carry out such bombings in this jurisdiction. The Barron report stated that there are grounds for suspecting that the bombers may have had assistance from members of the British military establishment. There is still a degree of speculation as to the line up of individuals actually involved in each stage of the preparation, planning and placing of the bombs. The survivors and families of the deceased have questions which they want answered. They demand answers and, more importantly, they have the right to know the truth. The British Government has in its possession files which could answer those questions. Despite a previous request by this House to release the files and numerous requests by a previous Taoiseach to have the files released and the constant campaign by Justice for the Forgotten, the British Government has refuted these calls. Given the week that is in it and all the talk of reconciliation and moving on it would be the ideal opportunity for the British Government to finally do what is right and release the files. It is not surprising that the British establishment might not want to own up to its seedy role during the conflict. It might not even wish to have its association with sectarian multiple killers aired publicly. Someone knows who orchestrated, planned and carried out those atrocities. Political posturing and self-interest cannot be an obstacle to moving the situation forward. We all have a responsibility, individually and collectively, to create the circumstances in which the needs of all victims are met. We have had enough procrastination on this issue. I take on board the comments of the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, on this evening’s meeting between the British Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron, and the Taoiseach. I also heard the comments earlier today made by the Mr. William Hague, that the British Government is willing to discuss the issue. That is not good enough. The time for discussion is over. We need a real and meaningful, forthright engagement, at the highest level of Government, on the matter. Victims, survivors and families demand it. Justice demands it. The files must be released without delay.

Deputy Gerry Adams: Ba mhaith liom an rún seo a mholadh. I welcome Justice for the Forgotten and commend the group on its dedication and determination. I also commend Rela- tives for Justice and representatives of the Pat Finucane Centre who were in the Gallery last night. Tá sé ráite ag an grúpa Justice for the Forgotten gur thug cuairt Bhanríon Shasana seans órga do Rialtas Shasana a chomhaid ar fad a chur ar fáil. I commend the motion to the House. Hiding the truth of its involvement in human rights abuse is something the British system has done well through scores of conflicts. Currently in London, four survivors of the notorious detention camps operated by the British authorities in Kenya in the 1950s are taking the British Government to court for compensation. An open letter from the Kenya Human Rights Com- mission declares: “It is a little known fact that during the Mau Mau war in the run-up to Kenyan independence, the then British Government systematically violated human rights and committed war crimes on a vast scale”. I raise this issue because it is the context for acts of violence in Belfast, Derry, Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk 20 years later, in 1974. Following the violent suppression of the civil rights campaign in the late 1960s and the pogroms against Catholic areas by the Unionist regime, the British Government brought its tactics from Kenya and Aden to this country. It also employed some of the same people. Among them was Brigadier Frank Kitson, who was posted to Belfast. Kitson was the British Army’s foremost expert on counter insurgency. He had served in many of the wars Britain had fought and lost during the 1950s and 1960s, includ- 728 Dublin and Monaghan 18 May 2011. Bombings: Motion (Resumed) ing Malaya, Cyprus, Aden and Kenya. In Kenya, Kitson established pseudo gangs of loyalist Kenyans who carried out actions against ordinary citizens and sought to discredit the Kenyan freedom fighters. In his book Low Intensity Operations, Kitson sets a context and outlines a template for much of what happened in the following decades in the North and in this State. I commend that book to Deputies. It was as a result of his strategies that British intelligence agencies, working with the RUC, infiltrated loyalist paramilitary groups, including the Ulster Defence Associ- ation, which they helped to establish. The British Army set up the UDA and it reorganised the UVF. Collusion between the British State agencies and Unionist death squads was structured, institutionalised and was a matter of British Government policy and administrative practice. It was not an accident. There are many tragic examples of this, including attacks on Sinn Féin members and family members and the murder of councillor Eddie Fullerton, mar adúirt Pádraig Mac Lochlainn. His murder was just one of these, but perhaps the most infamous is the murder of human rights lawyer, Pat Finucane, who was shot in his home in February 1989. This is how collusion worked and it is the backdrop to the attacks in Dublin and Monaghan. The Glenanne gang, which was responsible for this attack, was a mixture of UVF, RUC and UDR personnel. The independent international panel on collusion found that this gang was responsible for at least 74 murders. This included the Dublin-Monaghan bombs and the bomb attack in December in Dundalk in which two men, Jack Rooney and Hugh Waters, were killed. As we all know, in 2001 a commission of inquiry, under Mr. Justice Henry Barron, was established by the Irish Government. Ní raibh sé de chumhacht ag an Breitheamh Barron iachall a chur ar daoine fianaise a thabhairt in aghaidh a dtola agus ní raibh sé sásta leis an leibhéal comhoibrithe a fuair séón Ministry of Defence sa Bhreatain. I 1999, chinn an Taoiseach ag an am, Bertie Ahern, ar fiosrúcháin ar leith a chur ar siúl leis an scéal a fhiosrú. Ach go dtí seo, níl dul chun cinn déanta leis an fhírinne a bhaint amach. Níos mó ná 30 bliain níos moille, tá an fhírinne fós á chuartú. As people here know, four reports were published and a sub-committee of cross-party Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights conducted an extensive examination of the reports. Despite its conclusions and despite the mountain of evidence, the British Government has refused to co-operate with investigations and attempts to get to the truth. Imagine this happened somewhere else. Imagine reading in some of our newspapers that one state had committed such an atrocity against another state, that the government and Parliament of the victim state had brought forward all of the evidence and the other state refused to co-operate and ignored the request from the government and Parliament. I accept there is a responsibility in terms of asserting all the time that this is an independent sovereign Government. It needs to be asserted. I regret that the Taoiseach did not respond positively to my proposal yesterday that the Irish and British Governments should invite a reputable and independent international body to create an independent international truth commission as part of a viable truth recovery process that would deal with all of the legacy issues. The Government needs to get its act together on how to deal with this issue of the past. It cannot be left to the British Government any more than it can be left to any other combatant force. Much is being made at this time of the visit by the English Queen. Sinn Féin has set out its position on all of the matters around this. I have also made it clear that we hope some good comes from this visit. However, if the visit is to have a real and lasting significance beyond its important symbolic gestures, the Government must realise that this is but part of a journey. It is a page in a book, not the end of the book. Our country is still partitioned and our people 729 Local Authority 18 May 2011. Boundaries

[Deputy Gerry Adams.] are divided. We need, and the Government needs to lead on this, to end these divisions and to build unity and freedom. We need to continue that journey beyond this week. On Saturday, the Queen will have gone. We need to continue working ahead. We need to write the next chapter of our book and we need to deal with the past as part of that. Genuine national reconciliation, an inclusive healing process and the closure which victims, victim’s families and survivors deserve, demand that all of us must pledge ourselves to tell and to hear the truth about the past. For my part, I will actively encourage republicans to co- operate with such a process. In the meantime, the victims of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, of the bomb in Dundalk and other killings in this State must be supported. That includes the need for the Government to restore funding to the Justice for the Forgotten group. This morning, the British Foreign Secretary, William Hague said, “I tend to almost always favour transparency and openness in government, including about the past, but there are legal constraints”. Alas, that is not good enough and the Tánaiste should say so. I welcome the confirmation from the Minister that the Taoiseach has raised this issue with the British Prime Minister. I look forward to Mr. Cameron agreeing to the demand of the Dáil, the Taoiseach and of the families of the Justice for the Forgotten campaign. Níos mó ná 30 bliain níos moille, tá an fhírinne fós caillte. I urge this Dáil to support the motion.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjournment Debate

————

Local Authority Boundaries Deputy Joe Carey: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this very important matter. I acknowledge that the Minister for the Environment Community and Local Govern- ment has seen fit to come in to answer the debate. Tonight I reiterate my opposition to a boundary extension into County Clare. There is no justifiable reason for Limerick City to extend into County Clare. There is no justifiable reason for County Clare to sacrifice a portion of our lands to resolve a problem which clearly does not exist. The simple fact is this proposal is unwarranted and would create more problems than it would solve. We in the Banner County are a very proud people. Indeed, I am a proud Clare man, born and bred. County Clare is steeped in history, heritage and tradition. If a boundary extension into County Clare were to be granted, it would rob people of their identity, of their link to where they are from, their very history and heritage. The primary proposal put forward in the Limerick local government review is that there should be one local governance structure to manage Limerick city and Limerick county. The people of Clare have absolutely no problem with this proposal, but the people of Clare have a major issue with the plan to expand the Limerick city boundary into County Clare. We are told by the Limerick local government review group that its motivation to seek a boundary extension into County Clare is in order to create a critical mass of population which will in turn improve the prospects of attracting foreign direct investment. This idea is fine in theory but is not grounded in reality. Changing a line on a map does not create a population. The people already exist and the critical mass already exists, but we simply live in different counties. Placing 3,000 Clare people into Limerick will not sort out our financial woes. However, it will create bad feeling, division, resentment and bitterness. It is very clear the people of Clare are very much opposed to a boundary extension. I applaud the efforts of the Clare against the Boundary Extension Committee under the chairmanship of Jim Gully. 730 Local Authority 18 May 2011. Boundaries

This group was formed in 1996 and took a survey at the time which resulted in 90% of residents living in Westbury, Shannon Banks, Meelick and Parteen expressing a deep desire to remain in County Clare under the jurisdiction of Clare County Council. In recent times Clare against the Boundary Extension Committee has organised very successful public demonstrations which have received massive support, including the support of every political party in the county. If we are to pull ourselves out of the economic disaster zone in which our country finds itself, we need to work together. In the same way, there is no reason a better level of co-operation between the local authorities in County Clare, Limerick city and Limerick county cannot take place. This approach would result in a better quality of public service being delivered. There is no reason public services cannot be shared to a much greater extent. A joint effort between local authorities in Counties Clare and Limerick on the delivery of public services is a far better option than changing county boundaries to solve a problem that does not exist. I acknowledge the forthright approach to this issue by the new Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, which is in deep contrast to the efforts of the former Minister, Mr. Gormley. In the short time the Minister, Deputy Hogan, has held his brief he has facilitated meetings with representatives from Limerick city, Limerick county and County Clare. As he moves towards a decision on the Limerick local government review group report I know the Minister will take on board the genuine and deeply held opposition in County Clare to any boundary change. I am appealing to the Minister to drop any of the proposals to grant a boundary extension from Limerick city into County Clare. The solution must be an insistence on a far greater level of co-operation between the local authorities of Counties Clare and Limerick which would not interfere in any way with county boundaries. I would be grateful if the Minister could tell the House when he expects to make a formal decision on the report.

Deputy Dara Calleary: They would take their hurlers though.

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): I thank Deputy Carey for raising this matter. As the House is aware, the issue of a boundary extension for Limerick city forms one element only of what is a complex and challenging set of circumstances in the city and county and the wider mid-west region. Limerick city, in particular, has faced obvious socioeconomic challenges. The population at the heart of the urban area has been in decline, the city itself has experienced pronounced deterioration, unemployment levels have been consistently above the national average and severe levels of deprivation have existed in certain areas. In addition, political and administrative leadership in the region has lacked cohesiveness and has been unable to contribute as effectively as it should to addressing these difficulties. Against this backdrop, the report of the Limerick local government committee on the most appropriate local government arrangements for the city and county of Limerick — the Brosnan report — was published in September 2010. The report concluded that the needs of the people of Limerick are not being well served by the existence of two separate councils and that the only fully satisfactory resolution of the issues involved is through the creation of an integrated local authority under the leadership of a single elected council and single management structure. The Brosnan report makes a strong case for new governance arrangements. A unified Limerick local authority would introduce a single authority of scale with the strength, assets and capacity to meet Limerick’s challenges. It would bring about a more cohesive and better integrated local government system for Limerick city and county. It would create potential for better value for money, eliminate duplication and free up financial and human resources for critical projects such as the revitalisation of Limerick’s city centre, regeneration and the support of enterprise. 731 Departmental 18 May 2011. Programmes

[Deputy Phil Hogan.]

At a strategic level, there is a strong resonance between the Brosnan report and the report of the local government efficiency review group, as well as the Government’s response to the national economic circumstances. The local government efficiency review group recommended the delivery of corporate services on a joint basis across contiguous local authority areas and joint management structures in order to generate scale efficiencies in local government structures. The review group recommended ten such joint administrative areas and stated that, at a minimum, Limerick city and county should be jointly administered. On boundary alterations, the Brosnan report also recommended the incorporation of urban elements of County Clare within the city area of the new merged city and county. The report proposed the inclusion of the housing estates of Shannon Banks and Westbury, and adjacent developments, which are a de facto part of the urban fabric of Limerick city, in addition to that part of the University of Limerick campus which is north of the Shannon. I have an open mind on the Clare aspect of the Brosnan recommendations. I can certainly see logic to it in terms of the overall shape of the city, ensuring that possible future development proposals are appropriately addressed. However, I am also aware of the counter arguments, some of which have been made by the Deputy. I recognise the proposal does not enjoy the same degree of support as other aspects of the report, and it is probably not as essential to the core issues dealt with in the report as the Limerick city and county aspect. The detachment of a portion of the functional area of one county authority and its incorporation into another would involve legal and administrative complexity. In any event, there needs to be an effective arrangement to ensure the efficient discharge of local government functions in the areas in question so as to deal with any issues that might arise. While there may be differing views as to the best approach, there is virtually universal agreement that circumstances should not be left as they are. I will certainly reflect on the Deputy’s comments. I appreciate the consultation I have had with the representatives from Limerick and Clare and I will be bringing proposals to Government in the very near future to bring this matter to a conclusion one way or the other.

Departmental Programmes Deputy Dara Calleary: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for affording me the opportunity to raise this matter and I thank the Minister for being present. I commend the Minister on the focus he brought to his Department since 9 March; it is a refreshing change. The Minister will be very familiar with the RAPID programme as he comes from a city in which it has been rolled out in a very successful manner. Coincidentally, it has been rolled out there for many years by a Ballina man, Mr. Ronan Ryan. Ballina was unfortunate in that it did not benefit from the programme in the early stages. The local authority decided not to apply, despite the fact that the town qualified on all grounds. In 2009, we received RAPID status and during 2010 an early implementation team was established involving consultation with community organisations and residents’ associations according to the format evidenced throughout the country. In October last, a series of projects was submitted to the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs through Pobal to have RAPID funding sanctioned. The total value of the projects came to approximately €250,000 and they included a range of residents’ association projects and the refurbishment of a community centre. Also included was a CCTV project. CCTV was to be installed to assist in combating anti-social behaviour in all areas of the town. The project has been with Pobal since then. I asked the Minister a parliamentary question on this issue some weeks ago and he replied that no decision had yet been made. 732 Departmental 18 May 2011. Programmes

The Minister is to visit the town on Friday and will be made very welcome. Can he clarify whether there is any funding left for the programme? If not and if he is still awaiting a decision thereon, would it be possible for him to meet representatives of the implementation committee when he visits? He knows the value of the projects and of the RAPID programme. The projects are focused and will directly tackle disadvantage in communities. The CCTV project, in particular, will benefit the entire town. I thank the Minister for listening and look forward to his response.

Deputy Phil Hogan: I am pleased to have an opportunity to address the House on the subject of RAPID and the position regarding a number of new areas that have been brought into the programme in recent years, including Ballina, as mentioned by the Deputy. As the Deputy knows, since 1 May 2011 I have taken over responsibility for the community dimension. The RAPID programme was first launched in February 2001 with the aim of prioritising and co-ordinating State assistance in some of the most deprived areas of Ireland. Originally, 25 areas were targeted and this number has now increased to 51, including five provincial towns that were designated new RAPID areas in May 2009. These are, Ballina, Dungarvan, Enniscor- thy, Mullingar and Rathkeale. In December 2009, the previous Government gave approval for disbursements from the Dormant Accounts Fund for a once-off measure up to the value of €1.25 million over 2010-11 for the five new provincial towns incorporated under RAPID. In late December 2010, Pobal, which advertises, appraises and recommends beneficiaries under various dormant accounts measures, submitted recommendations to the Department for the RAPID additionality measure. In this context, it should be noted that dormant accounts funding is not “free money” to Departments. All Departments have to source the moneys up-front from within their normal allocated Votes to undertake dormant accounts programmes in exactly the same way as any other funding programmes. For that reason, dormant accounts programmes have to be regarded by Government within overall budgetary considerations in the same way as any other funding programme. If a Department’s overall Vote is reduced, the scope for undertaking new dormant accounts programmes is, therefore, naturally curtailed. Income from dormant accounts is not regarded as revenue for the Government. When moneys are spent from the fund, the Government must account for the fact that such moneys could be reclaimed by the account or policyholder in the future, so it is regarded as an accrued liability. This liability is recorded in the general Government debt, GGD, and future disbursements from the fund will also increase the GGD, which must also be taken into consideration by Government given the existing debt levels. The priority in regard to dormant accounts funding in the current climate must be to ensure that existing contractual commitments can be met. I can confirm that eight projects have been prioritised by Pobal under the RAPID additionality measure for Ballina. These are currently being considered by my Department in the context of the reduced level of funding available in the current year, and also in the context of the review of expenditure that is being undertaken. Any decisions arising will be notified to all applicants as soon as possible. I have discussed with my Department, as recently as this morning, the five towns and the issues associated with funding for these new proposals with a view to making progress thereon. I do not expect to be in a position to make progress on the ambitious programme launched in 2010 but I will be considering the submissions of the towns to see what progress can be made on any aspects thereof. I have asked my Department to expedite the proposals in view of the fact that they relate to disadvantaged areas. 733 The 18 May 2011. Adjournment

Road Network Deputy Seamus Healy: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this item for discussion on the Adjournment and thank the Minister for taking it. I appeal to the Minister to fast-track the Tipperary Town bypass, which is part of the N24. It is vital to the economic and social development of the town, west Tipperary and south Tipperary generally. There is considerable frustration in the county, particularly in west Tipperary, as a result of the considerable delays relating to the project. It has been ongoing for very many years and was promised by successive Governments. Tipperary Town Council, South Tipperary County Council and Oireachtas Members for Tipperary South have been meeting Ministers and Department officials about the bypass for 12 years or more, yet the very important project has not been commenced. It is effectively the link between Limerick and Rosslare. It is vital to the economic and social development of the county. The main street of Tipperary Town is choked with traffic every day. Business is affected. The health and safety of the population is affected on an ongoing basis. Tipperary Town is a RAPID town and has very high unemployment. It had high unemployment even during the Celtic tiger years. The bypass of the town is vital to business and economic development in the town and south Tipperary generally. There was a positive cost-benefit analysis of the project. The environmental impact statement is being prepared, as are the compulsory purchase orders. I appeal to the Minister to fast-track the project urgently. If we are to proceed as we are doing at present, it could be more than six years before it will be completed.

Deputy Phil Hogan: I reply in this debate on behalf of my colleague the Minister for Trans- port, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Leo Varadkar. I thank Deputy Healy for raising the matter on the Adjournment and for the opportunity to address the issues involved. The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport has responsibility for overall policy and funding relating to the national roads programme. The construction, improvement and maintenance of individual national roads is a matter for the National Roads Authority, NRA, under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007 in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. The NRA has informed the Minister that the present situation with this project is that the N24 Pallasgreen to Cahir scheme, which includes the bypass of Tipperary town, now incorporates the N24 Pallasgreen to Bansha scheme and the N24 Cahir to Bansha scheme. Consultants have been appointed to progress the environmental impact statement for the scheme and it is anticipated that this will be ready for publication later this year. The allocation for this work in 2011 is €456,000. The Minister, Deputy Leo Varadkar, understands the Deputy’s concern for the development and growth of the town of Tipperary, as I do, given that I am a frequent traveller in that direction. However, in the funding of national road schemes such as this it must be emphasised that progress on particular road schemes will be very much dependent on the availability of funds within a reduced capital budget. I am not in a position to say any more than that this evening. The environmental impact statement and planning for the scheme should be advertised later year.

The Dáil adjourned at 8.55 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 19 May 2011.

734 Questions— 18 May 2011. 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 8, inclusive, answered orally.

Questions Nos. 9 to 32, inclusive, resubmitted.

Questions Nos. 33 to 45, inclusive, answered orally.

Pension Provisions 46. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if his attention has been drawn to any difficulties surrounding the issue of judges’ pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11722/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The issue of the treatment of pension benefits for taxation purposes is not the responsibility of my Department.

Prison Accommodation 47. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the interim measures he plans to take or has taken to address the overcrowding currently in Irish prisons; the criteria an inmate must satisfy to be granted an early release; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11720/11]

53. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to address overcrowding in prisons; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11889/11]

59. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to tackle overcrowding in prisons. [11726/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 47, 53 and 59 together. There has been a significant increase in the total prisoner population in Ireland over recent years and as of 13 May 2011, there were 4,490 prisoners in custody and 835 on temporary release. The number on temporary release equates to 15.3% of the total prisoner population. 735 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] There were 229 prisoners in custody serving sentences of less than 6 months and 389 serving sentences of between 6 to 12 months. I am conscious of the level of overcrowding in our prisons and the impact that it has on services to prisoners. However simply increasing those numbers on Temporary Release to deal with overcrowding is not acceptable. Measures have been and are being taken to both upgrade our prison capacity but also to ensure that alternatives to custody are available and used to deal with those where a custodial sentence is not necessary. The State has been engaged in an ongoing capital programme with almost 600 additional prisoner spaces constructed and brought into use since January 2008. The construction of a new accommodation block at the Midlands prison will provide a potential 300 spaces, a new kitchen and work training/education block, and an extension to the visits/reception areas. It is planned to have the new block fully commissioned by mid 2012. A contract was awarded in late 2010 for the provision of 70 dormitory style spaces for female prisoners at the Dóchas Centre within the Mountjoy Campus which is due to be completed by end August 2011. The Irish Prison Service is also currently engaged in a project to upgrade and re-commission 36 cells with in-cell sanitation coming on stream by mid 2011 in the basement of the “C” Wing at Mountjoy Prison. The Fines Act 2010 introduces a number of measures to prevent the automatic imprisonment of fine defaulters. In particular it has provisions dealing with capacity to pay, payment by instalments, recovery by appointment of a receiver and community service in default of payment of a fine. I intend to introduce further measures which will allow recovery by means of attachment of earnings orders. One of the first Bills I brought before this House was the Criminal Justice (Community Service) (Amendment) Bill. It will require judges to consider imposing Community Service in any case where the appropriate sentence would otherwise be a custodial one of up to 12 months imprisonment. I also have asked my officials to look at a scheme where suitable long term prisoners might have the last period of their custodial sentence replaced by a form of Com- munity Service. The Deputy may also be aware that I recently established a committee to examine the need for new prison accommodation and they are to report by July. I look forward to considering their views. The criteria for determining the temporary release of a prisoner are set out in section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1960 as amended by the Criminal Justice (Temporary Release of Prisoners) Act 2003. Candidates for temporary release are identified by a number of different means but primarily on the recommendation of the Prison Governor or the therapeutic services in the prisons. A primary concern is public safety.

Proposed Legislation 48. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to amend the Domestic Violence Act to remove the restrictions caused by residency requirements and ensure non-married parties have better access to protection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11874/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Domestic Violence Act 1996, as amended by Acts of 2002 and 2010, makes substantial provision for victims of domestic violence who are not married to or in a civil partnership with their abuser. A person may apply 736 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers for a safety order if he or she has been living with a person as husband and wife for six months in aggregate of the previous twelve, and may apply for a barring order if he or she has been living with a person for six months in aggregate of the previous nine. Contravention of an order under the Act is an offence and is subject to sanctions under the criminal law. The Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill currently being drafted for publication as soon as possible this year will, it is intended, make further amendments to the domestic violence code. The requirement of a minimum duration of cohabitation in order to obtain a safety order will be removed. In addition, because the issue of access to children can sometimes give rise to violence on the part of one parent against the other, the protection of a safety order will be extended to couples or former couples who have a child in common, including where the couple do not live together and may never have lived together. The protections of a safety order or barring order will be made available to same-sex couples who have not registered as civil partners on the same terms that they are available to opposite-sex couples. There are difficulties in providing in law for the complete removal of the residency requirement in relation to barring orders for persons who are not married or in a civil partnership. The minimum residency threshold that does exist has enabled the courts to have a reasonable degree of certainty that a couple is cohabiting in a sustained relationship and therefore that it may consider putting a barring order in place. The threshold is set so as to exclude short-term casual cohabitation from the protections of the domestic violence code, but ensuring that a relationship sustained over a period of months is encompassed within the protections. Given the serious consequences of a barring order, which may exclude a person from his or her own home and restrict his or her property rights, there are constitutional reasons for ensuring that a clear threshold is retained. However, the Government Programme for National Recovery includes a commitment to introduce consolidated and reformed domestic violence legislation to address all aspects of domestic violence, threatened violence and intimidation in a manner that provides protection to victims. The Law Reform Commission, in its third programme of law reform, includes a general review of the law on domestic violence. I expect that the Commission will examine the residency requirements and any recommendations it makes will inform future legislative reform in this area.

Witness Protection Programme 49. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to enhance the witness protection programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11867/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): As the Deputy knows the Prog- ramme for Government contains a commitment to provide statutory guidelines for the Witness Security Programme and it is a matter on which I will bring forward proposals in due course. Since 1997, the Garda Síochána has operated a Witness Security Programme in response to attempts by criminal and other groups to prevent the normal functioning of the criminal justice system, including threats of violence and systematic intimidation of witnesses. Legislation was not required to establish this Programme, but its operation is supported by complementary legislative provisions. Thus, Section 40 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999 makes it an offence for any person, without lawful authority, to try to identify the whereabouts or any new identity of a witness who has been relocated under the Programme. The offence is punishable upon indictment by a fine or a term of imprisonment of up to five years. In addition, the intimidation of witnesses is an offence pursuant to Section 41 of the Act. Section 41 specifies the offence as harming, threatening or menacing or in any other way 737 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] intimidating or putting in fear another person who is assisting in the investigation of an offence by the Garda Síochána, with the intention of causing the investigation or course of justice to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with. The offence is punishable upon indictment by a fine or a term of imprisonment of up to ten years. By virtue of the highly confidential nature of the Witness Security Programme and the need to maintain the protection of persons in that Programme, it would not be appropriate to detail the specifics of its operation. I can say that it is being operated in a significant number of cases at present, and it has proven its worth over the years in helping to secure the conviction of very serious organised crime leaders. The Deputy may be aware that in 2003, the Court of Criminal Appeal made some comments about the WSP as it then operated. The validity of the operation of the Programme was upheld, including by the Supreme Court in 2005. Nevertheless, in deference to the weight that must be accorded comments made in the superior courts, a review was instituted by the Garda Commissioner. The outcome of the review resulted in some enhancements to the Programme so that it fully accords with international best practice in this area. The Programme as it now operates ensures the unambiguous separation of those responsible for the criminal investigation from the management of the Programme, to avoid any hint of a possible inducement being offered to the witness. The Programme is kept under review by the Garda Commissioner.

Proceeds of Crime 50. Deputy Jonathan O’Brien asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will provide the number of persons that have had their assets seized by the Criminal Assets Bureau within the past three years; the regional breakdown of these persons; if he will provide an itemised list of the assets seized; the monetary value for each person; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11859/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): In accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Assets Bureau Act 1996, an annual report on the activities of the Bureau is prepared and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. The annual reports of the Bureau provide details of the activities of the Bureau during the particular year, including detailed statistics concerning actions taken in accordance with the provisions of the Proceeds of Crime, Revenue and Social Welfare legislation. The reports include information concerning the number of cases in which the Bureau took action; the number of cases concluded by the Bureau and the total sums realised by the Bureau to the Minister for Finance for the benefit of the Central Exchequer. Annual reports for the years 2008 and 2009 are available in the Oireachtas Library and on the website of An Garda Síochána (www.garda.ie) and my Department (www.justice.ie) http://www.justice.ie/. The Annual Report for 2010 is currently being prepared. With regard to the specific information sought by the Deputy, I am informed that to provide such information would not be without its difficulties. In particular, the Criminal Assets Bureau is prohibited by legislation from disclosing details of ongoing investigations or legal proceedings prior to their conclusion. It is therefore the policy of the Bureau not to disclose information on individual cases until investigations have been completed and a final determination has been made by the Courts. In the circumstances, it is not possible to provide a regional breakdown of the persons targeted and an itemised list of the assets seized and the monetary value for each person, as to do so might identify individual persons and cases. 738 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Garda Vetting of Personnel 51. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to increase the efficiency of the Garda Vetting Unit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11880/11]

156. Deputy Alan Farrell asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he proposes to provide the Garda Síochána with the necessary resources to improve the response time of the Garda vetting applications process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11920/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 51 and 156 together. I share the concerns which have been expressed by various Deputies at the length of time currently being taken to process vetting applications. The vetting service has been expanded greatly in recent years as part of an ongoing, phased programme to roll-out vetting to an increasing number of organisations in the child and vulnerable adult care sectors. This target group is the clear policy priority and I am sure all Members of the House will agree with this approach. Obviously this has led to an increased number of applications for vetting being received in the Garda Central Vetting Unit. I recognise that it is important to process these applications within a reasonable time frame both for the benefit of the applicants and the organisations involved. Responsibility for the deployment of Garda personnel is an operational matter for the Garda Commissioner, taking into account all his requirements. I am informed by the Garda authorities that at present there are a total of five Gardaí, 76 full-time Garda civilian personnel and ten temporary civilian personnel assigned to the Garda Central Vetting Unit (GCVU). This rep- resents a very significant increase in the level of personnel assigned to the unit, which stood at only 13 before the current process of development in Garda vetting began in 2005. A number of immediate measures are being taken to improve the situation. The sanction of the Department of Finance has been obtained to retain the services of ten temporary employees in the GCVU. A further sanction has been obtained to engage an additional ten temporary employees for the Unit and these are now being recruited. This should have an impact on processing times. In addition, further steps are under consideration with a view to alleviating the pressure on the staff of the GCVU and to reduce the time taken for the processing of applications. I am informed by the Garda Authorities that, at present, the average processing time for vetting applications received at the GCVU is approximately 10 weeks. The average processing time for vetting applications fluctuates in line with periods of increased demand. In processing an individual vetting application, additional time may be required in cases where clarification is needed as to the details provided or where other enquiries need to be made, for example, when the person in question has lived and worked abroad. There will always be a reasonably significant time period required to process a vetting application. Registered organisations have been advised to take account of this in their recruitment and selection process. However, the Gardaí make every effort to reduce the time to the minimum possible consistent with carrying out what are very necessary checks.

Court Procedures 52. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if measures adopted for vulnerable witnesses providing court testimony in this State are in accordance with the UN 739 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[ Deputy Pearse Doherty.] Guidelines on Justice in Matters Involving Child Victims and Witnesses of Crime; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11879/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Criminal Evidence Act 1992 contains a range of measures designed to protect vulnerable victims and witnesses. For example, section 16(1)(b), as amended, makes provision for the video recording of a statement made by a person under 14 years of age, or with an intellectual disability (in respect of whom a sexual offence or an offence involving violence is alleged to have been committed) during an interview with a member of An Garda Síochána or any other person who is competent for the purpose. It provides that such a video recording shall be admissible at a trial as evidence, provided that the person whose statement was video recorded is available at the trial for cross examination. I am informed by the Garda authorities that, given the need for sensitivity and confidentiality surrounding sexual crimes, there is a clear advantage from an investigative perspective both for An Garda Síochána and victims of such crimes in conducting such interviews away from Garda Stations. Dedicated interview suites have therefore been established in six strategically chosen locations throughout the State, which are used by An Garda Síochána to record interviews with such victims. Work is also nearing completion on the establishment of a further facility. The 1992 Act also provided the basis for evidence to be given through a live television link by a person under 17 years or a person with an intellectual disability in any case involving a sexual offence or one involving a threat of violence or attempted violence. While such evidence is being given except through an intermediary, neither the judge, nor the barrister or solicitor concerned in the examination of the witness, shall wear a wig or gown. Section 14(1) of that Act provides that, in the case types mentioned, where such persons are giving evidence, the court may, on the application of the prosecution or the accused, direct that questions be to a witness be put through an intermediary if satisfied that, having regard to the age or mental condition of the witness, the interests of justice require. Several of these special provisions were replicated in the Criminal Procedure Act 2010 in order that they would also apply when such witnesses are giving victim impact evidence at sentencing hearings. I am informed by the Courts Service that they comply with the relevant UN Guidelines in respect of child victims and witnesses of crime and provides the necessary video link facilities as required under the 1992 Act. Subject to approval by the Government, I expect to bring forward further measures to take the formality out of court proceedings for children and prevent any intimidation by the accused.

Question No. 53 answered with Question No. 47.

Garda Strength 54. Deputy Jonathan O’Brien asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to allocate additional resources to the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11858/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the personnel strength of the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation Unit (GBFI) is as set out in the table here under: 740 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Rank Strength

D/Chief Superintendent 1 D/Superintendents 2 D/Inspectors 5 D/Sergeants 14 D/Gardaí 51

Included in the figures above are 11 additional Detective Gardaí that were assigned to the GBFI on 1 February 2011. The responsibility for the allocation of resources, including personnel, within the Force rests with the Garda Commissioner in consultation with his senior management team. An Garda Síochána is satisfied that the resources allocated to Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation are sufficient to meet the ongoing daily demands placed on the unit to investigate incidents of fraud, including a number of high-profile complaints currently under investigation by the Bureau.

Victims of Crime 55. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to improve communication between gardaí and victims of crime during criminal trials; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11866/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The new Victims Charter and Guide to the Criminal Justice System, which was launched in July 2010, provides a number of undertakings in relation to the interaction between members of An Garda Síochána and victims of crime. In relation to criminal trials, the Gardaí undertake to provide certain information to victims, including:

• whether the suspect is being held in custody or is on bail, and any conditions of the bail (such as an alleged offender staying away from a victim or a victim’s house);

• the time, date and location of the court hearing;

• the prosecution process and, if a victim is likely to be called as a witness, the support available from voluntary organisations which support victims of crime;

• when the law allows a victim to give evidence to the court about the crime’s impact;

• about court expenses; and

• the final result of the criminal trial.

An Garda Síochána also appoints Family Liaison Officers to assist victims of certain serious crimes and to victims and families of victims who have been or are being subjected to emotional or psychological trauma relating to homicide, kidnapping, false imprisonment, hostage siege situations, road traffic fatalities, suicide and crimes where violence, or an immediate threat of violence, has been visited upon the family. Family Liaison Officers are appointed to keep victims’ families informed of the progress of investigations and to ensure that they are afforded appropriate and relevant emotional, psychological, informational and practical support. In cases of rape and other sexual offences, 741 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] a member of the investigation team, approved by the District Officer (Superintendent), performs the functions of the Family Liaison Officer. At the launch of the Victims Charter, particular emphasis was placed on the further development of existing monitoring systems of services to victims, and the development of new systems where necessary, as one important means of ensuring that services to victims are improved. I want to see the undertakings to victims in the Charter by the various criminal justice agencies, including An Garda Síochána, implemented in practice. This is good for the victims of crime and is ultimately good for the credibility of An Garda Síochána. In particular, victims who are also witnesses can have legitimate concerns about, and unfamiliarity with, the trial process. If these concerns are addressed, victims can give their full attention to the task of giving the best evidence they are able to give.

State Visits 56. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the security implications of Queen Elizabeth II’s visit to Ireland; and if he is satisfied that all security precautions have been taken. [10468/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Garda Síochána, with the vital support of the Defence Forces, is responsible for the security of the visit of Queen Elizabeth. I have the utmost confidence in the Commissioner and his officers, who I know are totally committed to ensuring that these events pass off without incident. Senior Garda management is satisfied that all the necessary and appropriate measures are in place to ensure the safety and security of Queen Elizabeth. There is, of course, a whole range of security considerations that have to be taken into account in relation to the visit and those considerations are based on an ongoing assessment of the risks involved. This visit will be welcomed by the vast majority of the people of Ireland. Obviously there are those who would seek to disrupt it. The right to protest is an important one and one that the Government will always uphold — but we will not tolerate those who seek to break the law in this regard. An Garda Síochána will continue to make all the necessary arrangements to make sure the appropriate level of security is in place for the visit. This has of course caused a degree of disruption in terms of such things as temporary road closures. I am sure people generally will be understanding of the security arrangements which have to be made and will cooperate fully with them. Security arrangements are, of course, a necessary feature of visits of this kind to any country and I am sure they will not detract from the great welcome which Irish people will give to this distinguished guest.

Commercial Rent Reviews 57. Deputy Willie O’Dea asked the Minister for Justice and Equality when legislation to end upward only rent reviews will be introduced. [9938/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): As the Deputy will be aware, the Programme for Government indicates that legislation will be introduced to end upward only rent reviews for existing leases. I am engaged in on-going consultations with the Attorney General in order to determine how this matter can best be expedited. In addition to the legislation which has been specified in the Programme for Government, I am also very conscious of the fact that one of the difficulties in relation to rent reviews is the

742 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers absence of readily accessible and accurate information in order to determine the market rent payable in respect of any given set of commercial premises. The Deputy will recall that I arranged for the restoration of the Property Services (Regulation) Bill 2009 to the Order Paper. The Bill is now awaiting Committee Stage. I intend to bring forward amendments to the Bill to provide for the establishment of a public database containing relevant details of letting arrangements and rent reviews in the commercial property market. The Property Services Regulatory Authority will have responsibility for the management of this database. The recommendation regarding the database was contained in a Working Group report which was published in August of last year. That report also contained a recommendation for the adoption, by landlords and tenants alike, of a rent review arbitration code which was drawn up by the experts who participated in the Group and which was appended to the report. A particular feature of the code is that it contains detailed provisions dealing with the production of comparative evidence in relation to property transactions and it also places a firm duty on all parties to disclose all relevant information which is in their possession. As matters stand, parties are free to specify that the code should apply in relation to rent review arbitrations. I welcome the endorsement of the code by a number of significant stakeholders in the sector.

Garda Deployment 58. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if a company (details supplied) contributes to the cost of policing the Corrib operation; the amount, if any, they have contributed to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11877/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The deployment of Garda resources to Police protest actions in the North Mayo area connected with the Corrib Gas Project is a matter for the Garda Commissioner. The aim is to prevent public order offences and to ensure that people can go about their lawful business. There is no question of seeking a financial contribution from any private company towards the cost of the Garda operation.

Question No. 59 answered with Question No. 47.

Garda Transport 60. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Justice and Equality is plans to renew the Garda motor fleet; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11888/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): Over the last number of years there has been a significant programme of investment in Garda vehicles. This investment has resulted in the expansion of the fleet with consequential benefits to Garda members in terms of safety and operational capacity. Additionally, all Garda fleet requirements are kept under review. Future transport requirements will be pursued in the context of identified Garda priorities and in the light of available resources.

Joint Policing Committees 61. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of joint policing committees that have been set up here; the local authorities that have not set up the structure to date; the reason for same; the chairperson of each joint policing committee; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11870/11]

63. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to ensure that the joint policing committees become a greater facility for communities to interact with the Garda; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11876/11]

743 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 61 and 63 together. The functions and powers of Joint Policing Committees (JPCs) are set out in the Garda Síochána Act 2005, which provides for a Committee in each local authority area. They provide the framework for a partnership process involving An Garda Síochána and elected members and officials of the local authority, which are the two organisations which make the most significant contribution to preventing crime in an area, with the participation of members of the Oireachtas and of the community and voluntary sector. The Act provides that JPCs operate under guidelines issued by the Minister for Justice and Equality after consultation with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. I am informed by the Garda authorities that JPCs have been established in all local authority areas with the exception of Fermoy, Midleton and Skibbereen, where the establishment process for the Committees is being finalised. The Garda Commissioner has appointed Garda representatives to each of the JPCs in accordance with the guidelines. Section 35(2)(c) of the Garda Síochána Act provides that the chairperson of a JPC shall be drawn from the elected members nominated by the relevant local authority. Details of the chairperson of each Committee are held by the relevant local authority. Members of the public and community representatives and groups can interact with their JPC by communicating with the Committee directly or by communicating with any member of the Committee, including the appointed Garda representatives. All JPC meetings are as a rule open to the public, and all documents are available. Any person may submit questions in writing in advance of each JPC meeting. Each Committee is also required to hold regular public meetings, at which those attending have the right to make their views known and ask questions in accordance with the guidelines. The Programme for Government makes a commitment to build on existing community policing partnerships and forums to enhance trust between local communities and their Gardaí. Accordingly, I believe that it is appropriate to commence a review of the operation of the Committees, in conjunction with An Garda Síochána, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the local authorities. The review will take place in the context of the commitments in the Programme for Government to reform local government. In that regard, my colleague the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Govern- ment has said that he intends to publish at an early date a policy statement on local government, outlining government policy for an action programme to renew and develop the local government system.

Garda Deployment 62. Deputy Tom Barry asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will ensure that the distribution of Garda resources will adequately reflect changing criminal patterns, when travelling gangs of criminals are making the short journey to rural towns and communities and contributing to escalated burglary rates; and if he will ensure that the allocation of Garda resources now and in the future will take cognisance of this development. [11718/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I am acutely aware of the distress which burglaries can cause for affected householders and I have been assured that Garda management is constantly reviewing strategies to tackle this offence. Responsibility for the allocation of resources, including personnel, within the Force rests with the Garda Commissioner in consultation with his senior management team and the allocation of

744 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers personnel is determined by a number of factors including population, crime trends and the policing needs of each individual Division. One of the key objectives in the Policing Plan of An Garda Síochána for 2011 is for Effective Roads Policing. This is achieved with measures to “increase roads policing capability in An Garda Síochána to deny the use of our roads for criminal activity” and particularly involves the use of intelligence led checkpoints and patrols and the continued development of the Auto- mated Number Plate Recognition System. All members of An Garda Síochána, including those engaged in roads policing, play a pivotal role in targeting travelling criminals both on motorways and secondary roads, and work closely in a multi-agency approach to implement a co- ordinated use of Garda resources. The Government’s Programme for National Recovery also attaches a high priority to community policing. Community policing is at the heart of policing in Ireland, and has an important role in informing intelligence in relation to organised crime groups.

Question No. 63 answered with Question No. 61.

Prison Building Programme 64. Deputy Tom Barry asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the position regarding the Kilworth prison project, County Cork. [11717/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The development of a new prison facility at Kilworth Co. Cork to serve the Munster region is a key element of the prisons modernisation programme. It is accepted that conditions at Cork prison are less than ideal and the new facilities at Kilworth will, when complete, allow for the decommissioning of the accommodation at Cork prison and its replacement with new modern prison facilities. It is anticipated that the capacity of the new prison will be in the region of 450. Unfortunately, with limited resources in the present economic climate, it is likely that ambitious projects such as the development of new prison facilities at Kilworth will take longer to progress.

Garda Operations 65. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he plans to introduce new measures to tackle tiger kidnappings. [11724/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): Regular meetings are held between An Garda Síochána and Financial Institutions to discuss bank security issues and in particular tiger kidnapping prevention and response protocols. The response procedures in place for dealing with such incidents, which An Garda Síochána does not disclose as a matter of policy and security, typically include the establishment of Crisis Management teams and agreed protocols designed primarily to ensure the safe return of those persons held captive during such incidents and thereafter securing the arrests and prosecution of the culprits involved. When the protocols are followed the Gardaí are given a great advantage in their efforts to foil these crimes and arrest those responsible. That has been proven to be the case. Obviously if the Garda Commissioner proposes new measures which he feels would aid his officers in tackling those responsible for these crimes then these will be considered and where appropriate put before the Oireachtas for approval. Advice on personal security for staff members and on systems and processes in place for the conveyance, storage and dispersal of cash are provided on an ongoing basis and are subject of regular review. An Garda Síochána is absolutely committed to ensuring that the first priority

745 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] during the preliminary investigation of any such incident is the safety of staff and their families and loved ones. Legislation is now in place which provides for covert surveillance evidence to be used in Court, and the Gardaí are also in a position to utilise legislation which specifically targets the organised criminal gangs responsible for these reprehensible crimes. I want to assure the House that the Gardaí are totally focused in combating this form of criminality as part of the concerted efforts being made to tackle organised criminal gangs.

Question No. 66 answered with Question No. 41.

Proposed Legislation 67. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the date on which he will publish legislation to allow for the collection and dissemination, when appropriate, of soft information; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11884/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): My Department is currently preparing legislation to provide a legal framework for the existing procedures relating to employment vetting by the Garda Síochána of:

i) persons applying for public sector employment and

ii) persons applying for employment working with children or vulnerable adults.

This legislation is being prepared in close co-operation with the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, and the Garda Síochána. The legislation will place on a statutory footing the procedures regarding disclosure of criminal records information. It is also envisaged that the legislation will provide for disclosure of information other than records of criminal convictions, in regard to persons applying for employment working with children or vulnerable adults only where such information provides a bona fide reason for believing that the person poses a particular risk to children or young adults. The proposed legislation will require various safeguards to ensure that we provide adequate protection to children or vulnerable adults, while also safeguarding the rights of an individual applying for employment. I hope to be in a position to publish the General Scheme of a draft Bill in the next month or two, with a formal Bill being drafted and presented to the Houses of Oireachtas as soon as possible after that.

Garda Deployment 68. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of gardaí who will be used during the visit of the Queen Elizabeth II; if he will provide a breakdown of the number of gardaí who will be used at each stage of the visit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11885/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): An Garda Síochána, along with the Defence Forces, is responsible for the security of the visit of Queen Elizabeth II. I have the utmost confidence in the Commissioner and his officers who I know are putting in place all appropriate measures to ensure the safety and security of the Queen and her visit. An Garda Síochána will make all the necessary arrangements to ensure the appropriate level of security is in place for the visit, with the support of the Defence Forces. There is a whole

746 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers range of security considerations that have to be taken into account, and those considerations are based on an ongoing assessment of the risks involved. For security and operational reasons, it is not possible at this juncture to disclose the number of Gardaí being used for the duration of the Queen’s visit.

Garda Remuneration 69. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the average amount paid in overtime to gardaí in each year since 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11863/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The amount of overtime paid from the Garda Vote for each of the years since 2005 is set out in the table below.

Year Overtime Expenditure

€

2005 77,683,097 2006 102,653,111 2007 135,386,904 2008 112,476,173 2009 77,812,239 2010* 76,596,828 *The figure for 2010 is subject to final confirmation by way of the Appropriation Accounts process.

Crime Levels 70. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of persons convicted of offences of murder or assault offences against a woman in each year since 2000 who had previously stalked or harassed the victim; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11860/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): In the time available it has not been possible for the Garda authorities to supply the information requested by the Deputy. I will be in contact with the Deputy as soon as further information is to hand.

Question No. 71 answered with Question No. 43.

Prison Inspectorate 72. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to strengthen the Inspector of Prisons by putting the office on a statutory footing and removing restrictions on publication by the Inspector of Prisons of his or her reports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11875/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Inspector of Prisons has been established on a statutory basis since 2007 by virtue of Part 5 of the Prisons Act, 2007 and is independent. I believe it is an important role ensuring an effective independent oversight of our prison system which will continue to have my full support in carrying out its remit. As Minister, I am obliged to publish all of the Inspector’s reports and it is my intention to do this with all reports presented to me. I might add that under Section 31(4) of the Act, material in the reports that is prejudicial to the security of the prison or State, contrary to the 747 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] public interest, or which infringes the constitutional rights of any person may be omitted. In practice, however, no material has ever been omitted from the reports of the current Inspector. This provision was included to avoid a situation where the Minister would be obliged to publish a part of the report which both the Inspector and the Minister agree should be confidential, for example, a matter affecting security or where the Inspector wants to identify to the Minister a person who the Inspector believes committed a criminal act. It is also included to address a situation where comments made in reports might leave the Minister open to civil actions for defamation if published. A commitment to strengthen the role of the Inspector is contained in the current programme for Government. In that regard, I am keen to build on the relationships between the various prison oversight bodies and have asked my officials to examine the possibility of strengthening the links between the office of the Inspector and Prison Visiting Committees in particular.

Deportation Orders 73. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if there have been any cases in the past six months in which he has not signed a deportation order but has instead granted leave to remain here to a person in respect of whom an assistant principal officer in his Department had made a recommendation that a deportation order be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11887/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Deputy should be aware that while the preparatory work in all repatriation cases is carried out at official level in my Depart- ment, decisions are made by the Minister. Records are maintained by reference to decisions made by the Minister and not on the basis of recommendations by officials.

Garda Ombudsman Commission 74. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to enhance the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission’s powers in relation to the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11878/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): Under the terms of the Garda Síochána Act 2005, the extensive powers and responsibilities of the Garda Síochána Ombuds- man Commission apply equally to all members of An Garda Síochána. This legislation is kept under review, and I am generally open to any views as to how it might be improved, but I see no reason, nor do I think it practical, to amend it so as to apply differing levels of oversight to different sections of the Garda Síochána.

Diplomatic Representation 75. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will meet the family of a person (details supplied) who is an Irish citizen and has been arbitrarily detained in Sri Lanka since September 2009. [12030/11]

Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Eamon Gilmore): I refer the Deputy to my recent Parliamentary reply, No 80 of 10 May 2011, in relation to the person mentioned by him. As I confirmed to the Deputy in that reply, my officials remain in close and direct contact with the wife and family of the person mentioned by him and they liaise directly with her on any request for assistance or on any development on his case. The Ambassador and officers in

748 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers the Embassy in New Delhi, which is accredited to Sri Lanka, have also been very active in pursuit of progress in this difficult case. I understand that another meeting with the Head of the Consular Division and other senior officials of my Department is to be arranged in the near future and I can assure the Deputy that all possible consideration will be given to any requests that she may raise.

Overseas Development Aid 76. Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will provide an update on the way he is ensuring a more coherent policy approach among various groups and Departments concerned with the issue of overseas aid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12033/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Jan O’Sullivan): Ireland is playing a strong role in international development, building on the efforts and contributions of individual Irish people and organisations and the effectiveness of the Government’s aid programme. The Government is committed to the target of spending 0.7% of GNP on Official Development Assistance (ODA), and to seeking to achieve this by 2015. We recognise that ODA alone cannot provide sufficient resources for international development, and that developed countries need to work more effectively with developing countries on the mobilisation of domestic resources for this purpose. The reduction of poverty and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals requires a coherent and comprehensive approach beyond aid to include the other policy areas that have an impact on people living in poverty in developing countries. The Government is committed to improving the coherence of our development policy, across all Government Departments. I look forward to discussing our approach at an early meeting of the Inter-Departmental Committee on Development, which brings together representatives from all relevant Government Departments with the goal of promoting a coherent approach to overseas development. My officials are also in close contact with other Departments concerning issues relevant to overseas development, including taxation, trade, agriculture and global challenges, including climate change. The focus of Ireland’s aid programme is very clearly on the fight against extreme poverty and hunger, especially in the poorest countries of sub-Saharan Africa. It is important to ensure that our policy priorities are promoted at international level, within the EU and the United Nations, and in our dialogue with partner Governments in the developing world. I am also meeting with representatives of the Irish development Non-Governmental Organisations to discuss their work and to ensure that we co-operate to maximise the collective contribution which Ireland can make to the fight to end global poverty and hunger. In keeping with the commitment in the Programme for Government, we are now preparing to review the 2006 White Paper on Irish Aid. The review will involve wide consultation and will provide an opportunity to improve the coherence of our overall contribution to global development, through the aid programme, across Government, through our engagement with multilateral organisations and in co-operation with the non-Governmental sector.

Passport Applications 77. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will expedite an application in respect of a person (details supplied). [12057/11]

749 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Eamon Gilmore): I am glad to be able to say that the passport was posted to the applicant on 13 May.

Trade Missions 78. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his plans to undertake or lead trade missions to any of the following destinations Russia, China, India or Brazil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12058/11]

79. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the trade missions in which he proposes to participate during the remainder of 2011; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12059/11]

Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Eamon Gilmore): I propose to take Ques- tions Nos. 78 and 79 together. Discussions are ongoing with the current Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation in relation to the transfer of trade promotion responsibilities to my Department. As arrangements have not yet been finalised, I am not in a position to comment in detail on future arrangements in relation to trade missions. However, I anticipate that the two Departments will work closely together in the context of the Export Trade Council in prioritising such missions in the future and they will certainly include visits to the four countries identified by the Deputy. As the Deputy will be aware China, India, Brazil and Russia are all priority markets identified in the Trading and Investing in a Smart Economy Strategy and will remain a key focus for this Government. The Taoiseach will lead a trade mission to China later this year and the details of any Ministerial participation will be decided after the dates for the visit are confirmed. I hope to visit Moscow later this year myself and during that visit a meeting of the Ireland-Russia Joint Economic Commission is likely to take place. My colleague, the Minister for Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation, Richard Bruton TD, led a trade mission to India and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks, with full support from our Embassies in those countries. I would add that the Embassies in each of the four priority markets identified by the Deputy and in all the other priority markets are very active, in close co-operation with the State Agencies, in pursuing Ireland’s economic and trading interests.

Tax Code 80. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Finance his plans to introduce a scheme to assist hauliers with the cost of diesel; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11893/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): I recognise that the price of fuel has increased in recent times. The increase in the price of fuel is an international phenomenon. Fuel prices are driven by a number of factors including the price of oil on international markets, exchange rates, production costs and refining costs. The rise in oil prices over recent periods reflected additional factors such as geopolitical uncertainty in Northern Africa and the Middle East with potential supply disruptions. There is currently some limited scope under the EU Energy Tax Directive to apply a lower rate of excise on auto-diesel for commercial use. However, any relief here would be extremely expensive especially in the current fiscal environment. The excise on auto-diesel is currently around 20 cents lower here than the UK. Fur- thermore, a lower commercial rate would require an extensive rebate system which would be administratively difficult, costly to operate and open to abuse.

750 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

The issue of rising fuel prices was discussed by the Finance Ministers at a recent ECOFIN meeting where the approach taken in 2005 and again in 2008, when oil prices were high, was reconfirmed i.e. a co-ordinated approach was endorsed towards not making distortionary fiscal adjustments. For these reasons it is not proposed to introduce a tax rebate scheme to assist hauliers.

Tourism Infrastructure 81. Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Finance the plans of the Office of Public Works to progress work at Altamont Gardens, Ballon, County Carlow, to enhance tourism potential in this part of County Carlow. [11894/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes): Since the death of the owner of the property Ms. Corona North, the Office of Public Works has managed Alta- mont Gardens, while the complex legal issues relating to the transfer to the State are being resolved in consultation with the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. The Gardens have been managed to a universally acknowledged high standard and the Gardens now form a very important part of County Carlow’s tourism infrastructure, featuring strongly on the Carlow Garden Trail. The number of visitors to the Gardens also continues to increase under the stewardship of the OPW. When the issues surrounding ownership are fully resolved works to the overall property will be progressed to further enhance the site’s tourism potential.

Tax Code 82. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Finance when the abolition of the travel tax will come in to effect and if a refund of the tax will be made to passengers who have made bookings to travel after this date but whose bookings were made before this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11902/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): As I announced in my Jobs Initiative statement on 10 May 2011, I will be providing in the forthcoming Finance Bill for the Air Travel Tax to be suspended on or after such a day that I may appoint by Ministerial Commencement Order. To be clear, the commencement of this measure is subject to an agreement being reached with the airlines to bring in additional passenger numbers. My colleague, the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport is holding discussions in that regard. Furthermore, a review of the measure will be conducted before the end on 2012 to evaluate its success in bringing in additional passenger numbers; if the measure is considered unsuccess- ful, the air travel tax will be reapplied. Consequently the relevant legislation measures will remain in place to allow for them to be re-commenced if so required. On the question of refunds, airline companies are liable to air travel tax (ATT) only in respect of passengers who depart on their flights from relevant Irish airports. I consider that where an airline has passed the cost of the ATT on to its customers, it should refund this charge, without charging a handling fee, if the person does not travel or the ATT has been suspended at the time of departure.

Banking Sector Regulation 83. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance in view of the fact that they are not among the commercial semi-State bodies listed in the schedule of the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No 2) Act 2009, when he will apply the provisions of the Act to Anglo Irish Bank, Irish Nationwide Building Society and EBS Building Society each of

751 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[ Deputy Pearse Doherty.] which the Government is the sole shareholder or special investment shareholder and to which the taxpayer has so far contributed capital amounting to over €35 billion; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11911/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No. 2) Act, 2009 effected reductions in the remuneration of public servants with effect from 1 January 2010. Staff of the financial institutions referred to in the question do not meet the legal definition of public servant set out in this legislation and accordingly the provisions of the Act do not apply to the staff concerned. In relation to the matter of staff remuneration, the NTMA have recently, on behalf of my Department, requested the CEOs of each of the covered institutions including those referred to in the question, to review remuneration policy and practices in their institutions. The institutions have also been asked to consider measures that could be undertaken to align staff expectations with regard to benefits/remuneration to the changed economic environment and the financial circumstances of the banks.

EU Surveys 84. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance the reason Ireland no longer participates in collecting data to input in the European Economic sentiment indicator process (details supplied); if he considers it imperative that Ireland participates in this important data collection process be resumed without delay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11912/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): The European Economic Sentiment Indi- cator (or ESI) is generated through the amalgamation of the findings of a series of business and consumer sentiment surveys carried out in Member States. It is the European Commission, and not the Member States that is responsible for ensuring that these surveys are carried out. It is my understanding that up to 2007 the component surveys were carried out by the Economic and Social Research Institute for the Commission on a tender basis, but that, owing to a combination of factors they were unable to continue to do so. In early 2009, representatives from my Department, and from the Central Bank, met a representative of the Commission, at the Commission’s request, to discuss these surveys. During that meeting the Commission representative indicated that they were exploring new arrangements for the surveys to be carried out in Ireland. Both my Department and the Central Bank indicated their willingness to provide support to the Commission in making these arrangements if they could do so, and I hope that the Commission will find an appropriate solution.

Public Service Pay 85. Deputy Paschal Donohoe asked the Minister for Finance the cost of public service increments for 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011; and if he will be making further payments in 2011 and 2012. [11965/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Increments within the Public Service vary in terms of timing, cost and application both within and across the various sectors of the Public Service and estimates of cost are of necessity, tentative. It has been estimated that the annual cost in a full year of increments would be around €250 million. However, significantly reduced recruitment and higher numbers on the maxima of scales will mean that this cost will reduce in the coming years and will be affected by other

752 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers factors. These include retirements, voluntary redundancies, number reductions, recruitment rates and the numbers of employees reaching the maximum of the scale, which cannot be quantified. No specific provision is made in the financial allocations to public service bodies as they are required to meet the cost within their allocations. Suspending increments would affect some public servants but would have no effect on others. Generally, incremental scales are longer for lower paid staff than for higher. Accordingly a higher proportion of lower paid including front line staff would be affected by a suspension of increments. I have no proposals to change the current arrangements in relation to the payment of increments as they would disproportionately affect the lower paid staff in the public service.

State Properties 86. Deputy Michael P. Kitt asked the Minister for Finance when a decision will be made to transfer property at Knockaunglass, Athenry, County Galway to Galway County Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11987/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes): The Office of Public Works has decided to transfer the property at Knockaunglass, Athenry, County Galway to Galway County Council by way of licence. OPW advises that the legal formalities on this issue are currently being addressed by the Chief State Solicitor, and that the County Council is aware of the details pertaining to the OPW decision.

Programme for National Recovery 87. Deputy Kevin Humphreys asked the Minister for Finance when he will bring forward proposals on social impact bonds as included in the programme for Government and if those bonds will be administered by his Department or the Department of Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12003/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): The Government Programme for National Recovery 2011-2016 provides that the Government will establish a new model of financing social interventions — called Social Impact Bonds — that focus on outcomes for particular target groups, and attract private capital to support social provision. The Government will consider how best to establish this new and innovative mechanism and will bring forward proposals in due course.

Tax Code 88. Deputy Kevin Humphreys asked the Minister for Finance his plans to take submissions on the review of the universal social charge included in the programme for Government; if the process of review will be advertised to members of the Houses of the Oireachtas; when he expects the review process to open and conclude; when the findings of the review will be implemented; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12005/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): There is a commitment in the Programme for Government to carry out a review of the Universal Social Charge (USC). As I have stated before in the house, I would encourage all interested parties to join the review of the USC by way of submission to my Department. My Department is currently accepting submissions from interested parties, however, if changes to the USC are being proposed I would request well thought-out and workable solutions to fill any revenue gaps created. The focus must be on maintaining the €4 billion yield.

753 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Michael Noonan.] It is anticipated that the review will be carried out over the coming months and be completed in time for Budget 2012. When the review has been completed and the findings and recommendations are presented to me, I will decide on the appropriate action to be taken.

University Debt 89. Deputy Kevin Humphreys asked the Minister for Finance if he keeps a record of the debt burden of universities in Ireland; if those debts count towards the total sum of national debt; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12006/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Under the Universities Act, university borrowings must be in accordance with a framework agreed between the universities and the HEA, following consultation by the HEA with the Minister for Education & Skills and the Minister for Finance. There is therefore a Borrowing Framework in place for the university sector and as part of that Framework the universities are required to report annually to the HEA on their borrowings. The HEA monitors these returns to ensure that they are in accordance with the Framework. As Minister for Finance, I am not required to maintain a record of the debts of universities. Currently, in Ireland’s case, the universities do not fall within the definition of General Government. The debts of universities therefore do not count towards the total sum of national debt. To clarify further, the debts of the universities are neither part of national debt nor of gross government debt (the latter being Maastricht debt).

Tax Code 90. Deputy Regina Doherty asked the Minister for Finance the legalities in relation to payment of housing stamp duty for second time buyers who had entered into agreements but had not signed contracts on the day Budget 2011 was announced in December 2010; and if he will clarify the legalities in relation to payment of housing stamp duty for second buyers who had signed contracts on the day the budget was introduced in December 2010 but had not finalised sale. [12016/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): I am informed by the Revenue Commis- sioners that the stamp duty regime applicable to residential property was reformed under Budget 2011. A new lower stamp duty rate of 1% was introduced for residential property transactions up to €1,000,000 with a higher rate of 2% applying to the excess over €1,000,000. The reform also involved the abolition of certain reliefs relating to residential property. The stamp duty changes apply to instruments executed on or after Budget Day (8 December 2010). There are transitional arrangements in place to ensure that anyone who entered into a binding contract before 8 December 2010 is not disadvantaged by the new regime. A second time buyer, who had entered into an agreement but had not entered into a legally binding contract before 8 December 2010, is subject to the new lower stamp duty rates where the instrument of transfer giving effect to the purchase is executed on or after 8 December 2010. Such a person will not be in a position to avail of the transitional arrangements where the stamp duty treatment that applied before 8 December 2010 is more favourable than the treatment introduced under Budget 2011. A second time buyer, who had entered into a legally binding contract before 8 December 2010, will be entitled to avail of the new lower stamp duty rates where the instrument of transfer giving effect to the purchase is executed on or after 8 December 2010. Such a person will be entitled to avail of the transitional arrangements, where the stamp duty treatment that

754 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers applied before 8 December 2010 is more favourable than the treatment introduced under Budget 2011, provided the instrument of transfer is executed on or after 8 December 2010 but before 1 July 2011.

Appointments to State Boards 91. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Finance the appointments his predecessor made to State boards and State agencies under his remit for the years 2008, 2009, 2010 and to date in 2011; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12019/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): The information requested by the Deputy in relation to appointments made to bodies under the aegis of my predecessor is contained in the following tables:

2008

Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

An Post National Lottery Mr Donal Connell all appointed Mr James Hyland 08 Nov 2008 Ms Barbara Patton Valuation Tribunal Mr Tony Taaffe 16 Jun 2008 Mr James Browne 28 July 2008 Ms Fiona Gallagher 28 July 2008 Ms Veronica Gate 04 Aug 2008 Ms Mairead Hughes 07 Sep 2008 Mr Niall O’ Hanlon 17 Nov 2008 Mr Frank Walsh 17 Nov 2008 Financial Services Ombudsman Mr Dermot Jewell ( Chairperson) All appointed Council Mr Paddy Leydon 29 Oct 2008 Mr Frank Wynn Ms Caitriona Ní Charra Mr Paddy Lyons Mr Tony Kerr Mr Michael Connolly Civil Service Arbitration Board, Mr James Connolly SC, Chairperson 1 July 2008 Teachers, Gardaí and Permanent Mr Derek Hunter Defence Forces Arbitration Mr Tom Wall Boards Mr George Maybury Mr Hugh O’ Flaherty Mr Kieran McGovern

2009

Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

An Post National Lottery Mr Dermot Griffin 06 Nov 2009 Micheál Ó Muircheartaigh Valuation Tribunal Mr Michael Connellan Jnr 23 Jan 2009 National Treasury Management Mr Hugh Cooney 1 Jan 2009 Agency (NTMA) Advisory Committee National Development Finance Mr John Corrigan (Chairman) Chief Dec 2009 Agency (NDFA) Executive, (NTMA) ex-officio Mr Brian Murphy( Chief Ececutive) Jan 2009 Director, (NTMA) ex-officio National Pensions Reserve Fund Professor Frances Ruane 1 July 2009 Commission Mr Brian Hillery 1 July 2009

755 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Michael Noonan.] Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

National Assets Management Mr Frank Daley (Chairperson) All non ex-officio members Agency Mr Michael Connolly appointed 22 Dec 2009 Mr William Soffe Ms Eilish Finan Mr Brian McEnery Mr Peter Stewart Mr John Corrigan ( ex-officio) Mr Brendan McDonagh ( ex-officio) Irish Financial Services Regulatory Mr John Dunne 1 May 2009 Authority Mr Dermot Quigley 1 May 2009 Civil Service Disciplinary Code Mr Thomas Fallon (Deputy 1 Jan 2009 Appeal Board Chairperson)

2010

Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

Conciliation and Arbitration Board Mr Turlough O’Donnell All appointed 21 July 2010 for the Civil Service Mr Tom Wall Mr Gerard Barry Mr Kieran McGovern (Adjudicator) Civil Service Disciplinary Code Board Panel of whole-time officials 1 July 2010 Appeal Board of recognised trade unions nominated by General Council Staff Panel. (appointed for period of one year) on the 1 July each year )

Civil and Public Services Union Mr Eoin Roynane Mr Kevin Gaughran Mr Derek Mullin Ms Theresa Dwyer

Public Services Executive Union Ms Phyllis Behan Mr George Maybury Mr Billy Hannigan

Irish Municipal Public and Civil Trade Union Mr Tom Hoare Ms Geraldine O’ Brien

Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants Mr John Kelleher Mr Ciaran Rohan Implementation Body under Public Mr PJ Fitzpatrick 2 Jul, 2010 Service Agreement 2010-2014 Disabled Drivers Medical Board of Dr. Jimmy Leitch All appointed Appeal * Mr. Niall Mulvihill July 2010 Dr. John O’Keeffe An Post National Lottery Company Ms Caroline Murphy 06 Nov 2010 Mr Oliver Wilkinson 06 Nov 2010 Central Bank Commission Professor John Fitzgerald All appointed Mr. Max Watson 01 Oct 2010 Mr. Michael Soden Mr. Des Geraghty Professor Blanaid Clarke

756 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

National Pensions Reserve Fund Mr Paul Carty (Chair) 1 Aug 2010 Commission Mr Knut N Kjaer 2 Apr 2010 Mr John A Canning Jr 2 Apr 2010 National Treasury Management Ms Tytti Noras 1 Aug 2010 Agency (NTMA) Advisory Mr Brendan McDonagh 1 Sep 2010 Committee Mr Kevin Cardiff 1 Feb 2010 State Claims Agency Policy Mr Chris Fitzgerald 20 Oct 2010 Committee Mr Tony Delaney 22 Feb 2010 Brigadier General Christopher 22 Feb 2010 Moore (retired) Ms Niamh Moran 10 Mar 2010 Valuation Tribunal Mr Fred Devlin 4 Jan 2010 Mr John Kerr 4 Jan 2010 Ms Patricia O’Connor 22 Feb 2010 Credit Union Advisory Committee Mr Pádraig O’Cearbhaill (Chair) All appointed Ms Iris White 01 Sep 2010 Mr Michael O’Conaill Mr Gerry Murphy Ms Noreen Byrne Ms Denise O’Connell Mr Donal McKillop Decentralisation Implementation Mr Ultan Herr 17 Dec 2010 Group National Assets Management Mr Steven Seelig 25 May 2010 Agency *The appointments to the Disabled Drivers Medical Board of Appeal are made by the Minister for Finance on the nomination of the Minister for Health and Children.

To date in 2011

Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

Civil Service Disciplinary Code Board Panel of Serving (or former) 1 Mar 2011 Appeal Board civil servants (appointed for period of 3 years)

Revenue Commissioners Ms. Lynda Henley Ms. Kathleen Redmond

Department of Social Protection Ms Patricia Murphy

Department of Community Energy & Natural Resources Mr David Hanley

Department of Education & Skills Ms Ann McDonnell

Department of Public Expenditure & Reform Ms Patricia Coleman

Office of Public Works Mr Martin Bourke Ms Eilis O’ Connell

Office of the Attorney General Mr. Padraig McMahon

757 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Michael Noonan.] Name of Body Name of appointee Date appointed /reappointed

National Treasury Management Mr Donal Roth 1 Jan 2011 Agency (NTMA) Advisory Committee Central Bank Commission Mr Alan Ahearne 08 Mar 2011

Banking Sector Regulation 92. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Finance the action being taken by him to enact legislation that will make bankers accountable for their actions over the past number of years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12038/11]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): The day-to-day regulation of banks and other financial service providers is primarily a matter for the Central Bank of Ireland (the Bank). The Bank has a range of enforcement tools available to it to ensure the regulation of the Financial Services industry up to and including the bringing of summary prosecutions. Other agencies such as An Garda Síochána, the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforce- ment and the Director of Public Prosecutions have their own role to play in effective regulation. The Central Bank Reform Act 2010 provides for a fitness and probity regime for all persons working in senior or sensitive positions in the regulated financial services sector. The Bank is in the process of implementing that regime. The Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Bill 2011 will be published by the end of July and I expect that it will provide for the further enhancement of the supervisory and enforcement powers of the Bank.

Flood Relief 93. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Finance his plans to address the four impediments in the Camlin and Shannon rivers which cause severe flooding in the Longford Clondra areas (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12042/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes): The Office of Public Works has no responsibility with regard to the specific issues raised by the Deputy. Primary responsibility for the hydro-electric scheme at Tarmonbarry; Burkes Lock; and new lock gates lies with Waterways Ireland, and responsibility in relation to the concrete wall at the Millwheel in Clondra lies with Longford County Council. However, the Deputy should be aware that the Office of Public Works is currently involved in a number of initiatives to alleviate the flooding risk in the catchment concerned. The primary initiative in this regard is the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Study for the River Shannon, which commenced earlier this year. This study will identify and examine in detail the causes of flooding throughout the Shannon catchment, and produce an integrated plan of specific measures to address the significant flood risk factors in a proactive and comprehensive way.

FÁS Training Programmes 94. Deputy Noel Harrington asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he will ensure that a FÁS graduate (details supplied) will be given their certificate without delay in order that he can obtain work abroad; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12011/11] 758 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The certification of completion of any specific apprenticeship is an operational matter for FÁS in consultation with FETAC. I have no function in this matter. However, I understand that FÁS has submitted a request to FETAC for certification in the case referred to by the Deputy and that FETAC is processing the request in its next certification period, which is in June.

Child Care Services 95. Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Education and Skills his plans to provide child care facilities in vocational educational committee schools here. [11896/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Ciarán Cannon): As part of a commitment in Budget 2010, the Childcare Education and Training Support (CETS) programme was introduced in September 2010 by the Office of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to support students and trainees participating in certain FÁS and Vocational Education Committee (VEC) further education and training programmes. The CETS programme is expected to transfer shortly to the new Department of Children and Youth Affairs. Under the CETS programme, qualifying students and trainees can avail of free childcare places in daycare services across the country, including those operated by VECs, for the duration of their courses. Up to 1,000 service providers are participating in the programme and up to 2,800 full-time childcare places are available each year. Services participating in the programme are paid a capitation fee of €170 per week for each full-time place contracted under the programme at a cost of up to €24 million per annum. The operation of the CETS programme is being kept under review.

School Staffing 96. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he will ensure that in the interests of health and safety that a school (details supplied) will be allowed retain a teacher. [11897/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The standardisation of the staffing schedule for Gaelscoileanna so that it is the same as that which applies to primary schools generally was one of a number of measures introduced in Budget 2011 by the previous Fianna Fáil /Green Party government to control and reduce teacher numbers. These changes are effective from September 2011.The school referred to by the Deputy will now have the same pupil thresholds as ordinary national schools for the appointment and retention of mainstream class- room teachers. Given the financial constraints in which this country now finds itself, it is not possible to reverse these changes. This change will result in a reduction of the order of 50 posts in Gaelscoileanna. There are currently a total of over 1,500 teaching posts in these schools. The Gaelscoileanna movement is well established and I do not believe that the growth of Gaelscoileanna will be impeded by way of this measure. The actual impact at individual school level, including the school referred to by the deputy, is determined as part of the allocation process for 2011/12 school year and schools were notified in the normal manner. My Department’s Circular 19/2011 includes the criteria under which a school may appeal its staffing allocation and the process for same. This Government will endeavour to protect front line education services as best as possible. However, this must be done within the context of bringing our overall public expenditure back

759 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Ruairí Quinn.] into line with what we can afford as a country. All areas of Government, including Gaelscoile- anna, will have to manage on a reduced level of resources. The challenge will be to ensure that the resources that are being provided are used to maximum effect and in a fair manner.

97. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Education and Skills when funding will be made available for the re-appointment of a school liaison officer at a school (details supplied) in County Kerry. [11900/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I have arranged for my Depart- ment to contact the Deputy directly, in relation to this matter.

Emergency Works Scheme 98. Deputy Arthur Spring asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he will reconsider another source of funding for a school (details supplied) in County Kerry on the grounds of health and safety. [11904/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): An application under my Depart- ment’s Emergency Works Scheme for the drainage problem has been received from the school referred to by the Deputy. The purpose of the Emergency Works Scheme is solely for unforeseen emergencies or to provide funding to facilitate inclusion and access for special needs pupils. An emergency is deemed to be a situation which poses an immediate risk to health, life, property or the environment which is sudden, unforeseen and requires immediate action and in the case of a school if not corrected would prevent the school or part thereof from opening. This application was received in May and is being processed at the moment. The school will be notified of the decision in due course.

Special Educational Needs 99. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Skills the position regarding special needs assistants resource hours cuts (details supplied). [11914/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I wish to advise the Deputy that the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) is responsible, through its network of local Special Educational Needs Organisers (SENOs) for allocating resource teachers and Special Needs Assistants (SNAs) to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. This now includes a requirement for the NCSE to have regard to an overall cap on the number of SNA posts as well as a temporary suspension of the allocation of additional resource teaching support hours. In respect of SNA support, the NCSE has issued a circular to all schools advising of the allocation process for the 2011/2012 school year. A key feature of the amended scheme will be to provide for an annual allocation of SNA support to eligible schools. The NCSE asked schools to submit all applications for SNA support to them by 18th March, 2011 and intend to inform schools of their annual SNA allocation as soon as possible, in advance of the coming school year. In respect of resource teaching support, the NCSE has issued a Circular to schools advising them that the final date for schools to submit any outstanding, completed, applications for resource teaching supports was 13th May 2011. On receipt of all outstanding applications the DES and NCSE will be in a position to consider resource allocation for the coming school

760 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers year, in the context of the Departments Employment Control Framework obligations. Schools will be notified of their allocations as soon as possible. In the interim, children who are eligible for resource/ learning support teaching can receive this tuition through the existing learning support provision in schools.

100. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Skills the position regarding education in respect of a person (details supplied). [11915/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I wish to advise the Deputy that Special Schools funded by my Department are intended to cater for children and young persons with special educational needs from 4 years until the end of the school year in which they reach their 18th year. At that point, the Department of Health and Children/Health Service Executive assumes direct responsibility for young adults with special educational needs who are over 18 years. My Department, at that stage, may allocate resources towards an education component of such provision. However, my Department will consider requests from schools who wish to retain students who are over 18 years of age, for an extra school year, in circumstances where they are following courses leading to accreditation at a level of FETAC 3 or above. Applications received from schools in respect of individual pupils will be considered in the context of my Departments policy in this regard, as set out above. My Department encourages parents and school authorities to engage locally regarding pupils’ education. It is open to the parents concerned to raise any queries they may have relating to their child’s special educational needs, including education planning, directly with the school authorities. I can confirm that my Department has received an application from St. Michael’s Special School in respect of this person. When all applications for over 18s have been received, they will be considered in accordance with the criteria.

Departmental Funding 101. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Education and Skills the reason the professional development for support for teachers support service is cutting back the funding it is providing for Education Centres in 2011; if his attention has been drawn to the dramatic effect this is having on the centres’ finances; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11941/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Education Centre network plays a key part in the overall provision of continuing professional development (CPD) for teachers, and in this context my Department provides funding to education centres in respect of core budget, local courses, and, where a centre is the host location for a national CPD support programme, for the administration and operation of the programme in question. The overall amount paid to education centres in relation to core budget and local courses in 2010 was €4.69m. In 2011, the overall allocation for these purposes is €4.71m. The 21 centres in the national network of education centres, are bodies corporate with per- petual succession. The Centres have management committees to manage the business and staff of the centre. The Professional Development Service for Teachers (PDST) is a team of seconded teachers, which offers professional development support to primary and post-primary teachers on a wide range of topics. The PDST was established in September 2010, following a reconfiguration of

761 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Ruairí Quinn.] the support services in existence prior to that date. 2011 is the first full year of the operation of the PDST. In allocating budgets for any PDST strands my Department aims to ensure that the approved allocation is commensurate with the level of activity, and there is ongoing communication between the Education Centres, PDST and my officials in this regard. In some instances, this may mean that a reduction in budget is appropriate. The Deputy will appreciate that, as is the case with all expenditure, the level of funding to the education centre network as a whole, and indeed the teacher support services, is under regular review within my Department, with a view to ensuring value for money and economic efficiency, while providing a high quality service to the education sector.

School Registration Fees 102. Deputy John Lyons asked the Minister for Education and Skills the reason students attending post primary education are required to pay a school registration fee; if he will outline the rights of parents in this regard; and if assistance is available to families who simply are unable to afford this fee. [11951/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): It is a fundamental principal of the free post-primary education scheme that no charge is made in respect of instruction in any subject of my Department’s programme for Secondary Schools; recreation or study facilities where all the pupils are expected to avail themselves of these as part of the school programme; any other activities in which all pupils are required to take part. The Department recognises that registration fees are sometimes requested by schools in order to avoid “double booking” of pupils in schools. Under current arrangements, schools are allowed to request a booking fee/registration fee when considering applicants for enrolment, provided this is refundable at all times following a decision on enrolment. Voluntary contributions by parents or charges for optional extras over and above what is provided for in the general school programme are permissible under the scheme, provided it is made absolutely clear to parents that there is no question of compulsion to pay, and, that in making a contribution, they are doing so of their own volition.

Pension Provisions 103. Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin asked the Minister for Education and Skills the position regarding pension arrangements in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 3; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11989/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No. 2) Act 2009 provided the legal basis for a reduction in public servants pay, effective from 1 January 2010, while Section 3 provided that the reduction in pay under the Act would be disregarded for the purpose of calculating the public servant’s pension and lump sum for those who retired in 2010. The period of disregard was later extended to 29 February, 2012 by Statutory Instrument (Number 80/2011) made by the Minister for Finance. Accordingly, any public servants, including teachers, who are eligible to retire and do so no later than 29 February 2012 will have pension benefits calculated on the pre adjusted pay. Any proposal for extending further the period of disregard is a matter for my colleague the Minister for Finance.

762 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Vocational Education Committees 104. Deputy Seamus Kirk asked the Minister for Education and Skills the estimated savings to be achieved from the reconfiguration programme of the 33 vocational education committees across the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11991/11]

105. Deputy Seamus Kirk asked the Minister for Education and Skills the estimated savings to be achieved form the proposed merger of County Louth Vocational Education Committee and County Meath VEC; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11992/11]

111. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he has completed his consideration of the proposals for the reconfiguration of vocational education committees; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12061/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I propose to take Questions Nos. 104, 105 and 111 together. The previous government decided to reduce the number of VECs from 33 to 16 and on the merger of particular counties. I am anxious to ensure that progress continues to be made in the work on bringing about a reduction in the number of VECs. The IVEA has recently responded to my invitation to them to submit alternative rationalisation proposals, following their expression of concerns regarding the configuration of the proposed new entities. I will consider the IVEA’s response and decide on the particular mergers in the coming period having regard to the potential for savings and to ensuring that the new structures will be fit for purpose. It would be very difficult to accurately predict the savings which will arise from any one particular merger. Some of the likely savings from the restructuring of the VECs will come from the sale of existing VEC buildings. The potential revenue to be raised from the sale of these assets, however, is closely linked to the current state of the property market and it may not be possible to dispose of such buildings satisfactorily in the short term. This reconfiguration can over time yield savings in the recurrent cost of the headquarter functions of VECs which at present is of the order of €42 million in total, primarily comprising pay provision. The Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure Programmes suggested savings of €3 million. I am satisfied that a saving of that order is a reasonable projec- tion in the medium term.

School Staffing 106. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Education and Skills the reason for the withdrawal of special needs assistant services from a school (details supplied) in County Sligo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11995/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): Firstly, I wish to advise the Deputy that Special Needs Assistant (SNA) allocations are not permanent, as the level of SNA support allocated to a school may be increased or decreased as pupils who qualify for SNA support enrol or leave a school. They are also decreased where a child’s care needs may have diminished over time. The National Council for Special Education (NCSE) is responsible, through its network of local Special Educational Needs Organisers (SENOs) for allocating resource teachers and SNAs to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within

763 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Ruairí Quinn.] my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. This now includes a requirement for the NCSE to have regard to an overall cap on the number of SNA posts. I have therefore referred this query to the NCSE for their attention and direct reply to the Deputy. The NCSE has issued a circular to all schools advising of the allocation process for the 2011/2012 school year. A key feature of the amended scheme will be to provide for an annual allocation of Special Needs Assistant support to eligible schools. The NCSE has asked schools to submit all applications for SNA support to them by 18th March, 2011 and intend to inform schools of their annual SNA allocation as soon as possible, in advance of the coming school year. As such, the school referred to by the Deputy will be advised of its allocation of SNA support for the coming school year, taking into account the care needs of all the pupils attending the school and any new entrants.

Teacher Training 107. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Education and Skills the reason the Professional Development Service for Teachers support service has no Irish version of its website; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that this is contrary to the Official Languages Act of 2003; if he will rectify this omission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11997/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Professional Development Service for Teachers (PDST) are currently in the process of developing a new website for the organisation. In September 2010, the PDST was created as a result of the reconfiguration of a number of services to provide a coordinated response to training needs of teachers at primary and post primary level. The current website is a temporary holding page providing links to the site of each of the former services which constitute the PDST. The new website, when available, will conform with requirements in relation to the Official Languages Act.

108. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Education and Skills if all Pro- fessional Development Service for Teachers support service provides bilingual versions as bearla agus as gaeilge of all documentation including but not exclusively handouts, booklets and leaflets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11998/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Professional Development Service for Teachers (PDST) is a team of seconded teachers, which offers professional development support to primary and post-primary teachers and schools on a wide range of topics. The service was established in September 2010, following a reconfiguration of the support services in existence prior to that date, and 2011 is their first full year of operation. The PDST aims to provide bilingual versions of its documentation, materials and resources in accordance with statutory requirements. Where the PDST engages in face to face support with teachers and schools, documentation including presentations and handouts are provided through the language medium of the school. Generally, direct communications from the PDST to all schools are provided in both Irish and English.

764 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Institutes of Technology 109. Deputy Sandra McLellan asked the Minister for Education and Skills his plans to initiate an inquiry into the expenses claimed by the president of Waterford Institute of Technology; if he will provide a detailed breakdown of expenses claimed by the president’s department over a six year period; his plans to take immediate action; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11999/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I am aware of recent steps taken by the Governing Body of Waterford Institute of Technology to commission an external review of spending incurred by the Presidents office at the institute. I understand that this has been considered at a recent meeting of the institute’s Governing Body.The Higher Education Auth- ority has now sought a report from the institute on the issues that gave rise to the decision to commission an external review and of any issues arising from the external review. That report will be expected to address details of expenditure over the period in question, whether any departures from appropriate policies and processes in place to monitor and control expenditure have occurred and any actions proposed by the Governing Body in light of its findings.

School Staffing 110. Deputy John Lyons asked the Minister for Education and Skills the alleviation measures he will provide for a school (details supplied) in view of the detrimental effect the loss of three RTT posts will have; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12004/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I wish to advise the Deputy that the decision to withdraw Resource Teacher for Travellers was taken by the previous Govern- ment as part of the last Budget. The requirement to make expenditure savings and to ensure that staffing numbers remain within the Public Service Employment Control Framework prevent me from re-visiting this decision. Resource Teacher for Traveller posts/Teaching Hours for Traveller pupils will be withdrawn, effective from 31st August 2011. Traveller pupils who are eligible for learning support teaching should receive this tuition through the existing learning support provision in schools. All schools should select students for learning support on the basis of priority of need. Limited alleviation or adjustment measures are being provided to assist schools that have high concentrations of Traveller pupils who were previously supported by Resource Teachers for Travellers. In respect of Urban Band 1 DEIS, (Developing Equality of Opportunity in Schools), Travel- ler enrolments have been included in the valid enrolment for the purpose of allocating additional staffing under DEIS from the 2011/12 school year. The schools involved have already received their staffing allocations for next year.

Question No. 111 answered with Question No. 104.

Teacher Training 112. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he proposes to change the method by which newly qualified teachers are probated; if there is a timeline for any proposals which he proposes to implement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12062/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): Access to the profession of teaching in recognised schools in Ireland is regulated. The Teaching Council is the designated Com- petent Authority for the regulation of the profession.

765 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Ruairí Quinn.]

The Council requires that all primary teachers successfully complete probation in order to achieve full registration (registration without conditions). The Inspectorate of my Department evaluates the professional competence of primary teachers, in accordance with Circular 0058/2010, for the purposes of informing the Teaching Council’s decisions regarding registration. The Council requires that all post-primary teachers satisfactorily complete a period of post- qualification employment in order to achieve full registration (registration without conditions). The parameters surrounding this requirement are set down by the Council and involve princi- pals of schools in verifying that the required conditions have been met. In July 2010, the then Minister for Education and Skills wrote to the Teaching Council signaling that Section 7(2)(f) and Section 7(2)(g) of the Teaching Council Act 2001 will be commenced no later than 1 September 2012. The effect of this is that the Council will establish the procedures and criteria for the probation of teachers that the Council would wish to implement for primary and post-primary teachers following the commencement of these sections of the Act. There are no plans to change current procedures for the probation of primary and post- primary teachers in advance of 1 September 2012.

Traveller Education 113. Deputy Nicky McFadden asked the Minister for Education and Skills his views on the availability of teachers for Travellers at a school (details supplied) and if more alleviation posts will be created to ease the heavy demand so that students who need to repeat a year can be accommodated. [12063/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I wish to advise the Deputy that the decision to withdraw Resource Teacher for Travellers was taken by the previous Govern- ment as part of the last Budget. The requirement to make expenditure savings and to ensure that staffing numbers remain within the Public Service Employment Control Framework prevent me from re-visiting this decision. Resource Teacher for Traveller posts/Teaching Hours for Traveller pupils will be withdrawn, effective from 31st August 2011. Traveller pupils who are eligible for learning support teaching should receive this tuition through the existing learning support provision in schools. All schools should select students for learning support on the basis of priority of need. Limited alleviation or adjustment measures are being provided to assist schools that have high concentrations of Traveller pupils who were previously supported by Resource Teachers for Travellers. In respect of DEIS, (Developing Equality of Opportunity in Schools), Traveller enrolments have been included in the valid enrolment for the purpose of allocating additional staffing under DEIS from the 2011/12 school year. The schools involved have already received their staffing allocations for next year. For schools other than DEIS schools in receipt of enhanced pupil teacher ratios, alleviation measures are being provided to assist schools with high concentrations of Traveller pupils who were previously supported by RTT posts. Any alleviation measures must be considered in the context of the limited resources that are available to my Department. As such, alleviation measures are being concentrated on schools which had 33 or more pupils supported by RTT posts, based on 2009/10 school year enrolments.

766 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

I understand that the school referred to by the Deputy has been allocated one learning support alleviation post.

Teacher Training 114. Deputy Nicky McFadden asked the Minister for Education and Skills his views on the regulation of teacher training here with specific reference to the oversupply of qualified teachers (details supplied) in the Irish market. [12085/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): The Teaching Council is responsible for the regulation of the teaching profession in the State in relation to, inter alia, the recognition and registration of teachers, and the accreditation of programmes of initial teacher education. As the Deputy may be aware, the following colleges are currently recognised for the provision of initial teacher education for primary teachers in the State: -St. Patrick’s College of Education, Drumcondra, Dublin 9 -Mary Immaculate College, South Circular Road, Limerick -Colaiste Mhuire, Marino Institute of Education, Griffith Avenue, Dublin 9 -Froebel College of Education, Sion Hill, Blackrock , Co Dublin -Hibernia College, Clare Street, Dublin 2. The level of student intake to the state-funded Colleges of Education is determined annually by my Department and it takes account of the supply of, and demand for, primary teachers. The level of intake to these Colleges has decreased in recent years in light of available resources and factors impacting on demand. The Graduate Diploma in Primary Education offered by Hibernia College has been recognised for the purpose of qualification as a primary teacher for almost 10 years. As Hibernia College is a privately-owned institution providing a privately-run course, neither my Depart- ment, nor any other State body, has a role in regulating the number of students enrolled.

Psychological Service 115. Deputy Michael McCarthy asked the Minister for Education and Skills the number of private psychologists who are currently registered on the panel for the scheme for commissioning psychological assessment; the number of psychological reports commissioned by parents under the scheme in 2009 and in 2010; the number of psychological reports from private practitioners in 2009 and 2010 which did not result in an application for a further service; the number of Irish primary schools who do not currently have a national educational psychological service; and the total number of psychologists employed directly by the National Educational Psychological Service. [12087/11]

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn): I can inform the Deputy that all primary and post primary schools have access to psychological assessments either directly through my Department’s National Educational Psychological Service (NEPS) or through the Scheme for Commissioning Psychological Assessments (SCPA) which is administered by NEPS. Assessments are commissioned by the school authorities under the scheme and not directly by parents. Schools that do not currently have dedicated NEPS psychologists assigned to them have access to through the SCPA under which school authorities can commission assessments from a member of the panel of private practitioners approved by NEPS, and NEPS will pay the fees directly to the psychologist concerned. Private practitioners must satisfy a number of requirements for membership of the SCPA panel including, obviously, qualification to carry out the required educational psychological assessments. SCPA allows one assessment per 50 pupils

767 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Ruairí Quinn.] enrolled in the school. Currently there are 77 private practitioners listed on my Department’s website on the SCPA panel. The scheme was introduced as an interim measure to provide this alternative service in advance of NEPS reaching its target complement of psychologist staffing and in the light of increases in that staffing in recent years SCPA has diminished in its extent. In the 2009/9 and 2009/10 academic years my Department processed claims for 2,917 and 2,593 assessments respectively. A fee of €306 is paid in respect of each assessment on receipt of relevant certification from the school authorities involved and in the academic years referred to above some €0.89m and €0.79 was expended by my Department in this connection. To date some 175 psychologists are currently directly employed within my Department’s NEPS service and an additional three are due to take up duties shortly. Some 80% of Primary schools, representing 88% of primary pupils, currently have a NEPS psychologist assigned. Psychological assessment takes a number of forms and is used for a number of purposes. The primary purpose of assessment by psychologists in schools is to identify the strengths and needs of pupils within the context of the school. The main outcome of such assessment is to advise and support teachers on appropriate interventions to address the needs identified. The interventions agreed may involve the utilisation of resources available to schools under the General Allocation Model or may be provided by means of additional resources applied for by the school through the National Council for Special Education. Although NEPS has received, in the past two years just, copies of the reports furnished to schools on foot of the SCPA, this material is only used for the purposes of randomised quality control and NEPS has no overall information on the recommendations therein nor the resources that may have been forthcoming from the reports.

Pension Provisions 116. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Social Protection her views on correspondence regarding pension fund managers (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11913/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): The Government supports and encourages people to make provision for an adequate income in retirement. It does this through the provision of a State pension (contributory) which is currently 33% approx. of the gross average industrial earnings and through generous tax relief on supplementary pension savings. It is important that an individual’s pension savings is invested wisely and that charges incurred in the administration of a pension scheme are minimised. The National Pensions Framework which was launched in March 2010 recognises the difficulty that people can have in understanding the various charges that can arise and how these charges are applied. In this regard, it was proposed in the framework to introduce regulations to increase the transparency of pension charges. Following the publication of the framework, the Government established a number of groups to analyse all options in relation to the National Pensions Framework. These groups, comprising officials from a number of Government departments and agencies are charged with oversee- ing all elements of the implementation process. One of these groups is charged, among other things, with examining the options to bring greater simplification and transparency to the issue of pension charges.

768 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Social Welfare Code 117. Deputy Liam Twomey asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason different criteria apply depending on whether a person is applying for farm aid or fish aid; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11937/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): The farm assist scheme is a means- tested payment broadly similar to the jobseeker’s allowance scheme. It features a different means test, which takes account of the specific nature of farming. Unlike jobseeker’s allowance (JA), farmers claiming this payment do not need to be available for work outside of the farm in order to qualify. Fish assist is not a separate scheme. It comes under JA and features a different means test than that for JA. The scheme applies to persons engaged in sea fishing in a self-employed capacity. A self-employed fisherman may qualify for jobseeker’s allowance but must be, however, available for and genuinely seeking work. Across the spectrum of social welfare schemes, a range of different qualifying criteria and payment conditions apply that reflect the different contingencies facing various groups in society.

118. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Social Protection if she is concerned at a trend emerging regarding claimants for domiciliary care allowance who are being refused in substantial numbers initially but are successful on appeal; if she will review the instructions and guidelines under which her Department’s medical assessors are interpreting medical evidence in such applications; if she will expedite an application in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork which is presently being referred to the appeals office; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11959/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): Eligibility for domiciliary care allowance is not based primarily on the medical or psychological condition, but on the resulting lack of function of body or mind necessitating the degree of extra care and attention required. Each application is assessed on an individual basis taking account of the evidence submitted. The Department uses a set of consistent and objective guidelines in determining the medical eligibility of children for the scheme. These guidelines were drawn up prior to the transfer of the scheme from the HSE in April 2009 by a group, chaired by the Department’s Chief Medical Advisor, comprising senior medical personnel from the HSE as well as eminent professionals in the areas of physical disabilities which affect children and child psychiatry and psychology. All claims are assessed by designated Departmental Medical Assessors who have received special training in Human Disability Evaluation. In the case of an application which is refused on medical grounds, the applicant may submit additional information and/or ask for the case to be reviewed by a different Medical Assessor specially designated for this task. Where a person is not satisfied with the decision of a Deciding Officer, they may appeal the decision to the Social Welfare Appeals Office. Of the 5,333 applications processed in 2010, a total of 2,576 (48%) were allowed by a deciding officer. Of the 641 appeals finalised in 2010, 179 (28%) were successful. This figure is substantially lower than the average success rate on appeals across all the Department’s schemes and is an indication that the current application and assessment process is working in a fair and consistent manner. The Social Welfare Appeals Office has advised me that an appeal by the person concerned was registered in that office on 10 March 2011. It is a statutory requirement of the appeals process that the relevant departmental papers and comments by or on behalf of the Deciding Officer on the grounds of appeal be sought. These papers were received in the Social Welfare Appeals Office on 12 March 2011 and the appeal will be referred, in due course, to an Appeals Officer who will decide whether the case can be decided on a summary basis or whether to list it for oral hearing. The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently

769 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Joan Burton.] of the Minister for Social Protection and the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions on social welfare entitlements.

Social Welfare Appeals 119. Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy asked the Minister for Social Protection if a decision on an appeal has been made in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Offaly; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11988/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): I am advised by the Social Welfare Appeals Office that a revised decision favourable to the person concerned has been made by Department who will, in due course, be in contact with her regarding this decision. The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently of the Minister for Social Protection and of the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions on social welfare entitlements.

120. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Social Protection when a decision will issue on an application for carer’s allowance in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon. [12000/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): The Social Welfare Appeals Office has advised me that the appeal from the person concerned was referred to an Appeals Officer who proposes to hold an oral hearing in this case. There has been a very significant increase in the number of appeals received by the Social Welfare Appeals Office since 2007 when the intake was 14,070 to 2010 when the intake rose to 32,432. This has significantly impacted on the processing time for appeals which require oral hearings and, in order to be fair to all appellants, they are dealt with in strict chronological order. In the context of dealing with the considerable number of appeals now on hands, the Department has made a further nine additional appointments to the office in recent weeks. While every effort is being made to deal with the large numbers awaiting oral hearing as quickly as possible, it is not possible to give a date when the person’s oral hearing will be heard, but he or she will be informed when arrangements have been made. The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently of the Minister for Social Protection and of the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions on social welfare entitlements.

Social Welfare Code 121. Deputy Simon Harris asked the Minister for Social Protection the reason there has been a reduction in rent allowance on a property (details supplied); the criteria for rent allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12029/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): The Health Service Executive has advised that it has received correspondence from the landlord in relation to the rent limit applicable to the property in question and has further advised that the matters raised are under review. A reply will issue to the landlord of the accommodation concerned in due course.

Social Welfare Appeals 122. Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy asked the Minister for Social Protection when a decision on an appeal will be heard in respect of a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12031/11]

770 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): Payment of illness benefit to the person concerned was disallowed by a Deciding Officer following an examination by a Medical Assessor of the Department who expressed the opinion that she was capable of work. An appeal was opened and in the context of that appeal her case was reviewed by a second Medical Assessor who also expressed the opinion that she was capable of work. I am advised by the Social Welfare Appeals Office that, following receipt of the grounds of appeal from the person concerned, the relevant Departmental papers and comments of the Department have been sought. On receipt of its response, the case will be referred to an Appeals Officer who will decide whether the case can be decided on a summary basis or whether to list it for oral hearing. The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently of the Minister for Social Protection and of the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions on social welfare entitlements.

123. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Social Protection the position regarding an appeal for domiciliary care allowance in respect of a person (detail supplied) and if it will be dealt with as a matter of urgency. [12068/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): The Social Welfare Appeals Office has advised me that the appeal from the person concerned was referred to an Appeals Officer who proposes to hold an oral hearing in this case. There has been a very significant increase in the number of appeals received by the Social Welfare Appeals Office since 2007 when the intake was 14,070 to 2010 when the intake rose to 32,432. This has significantly impacted on the processing time for appeals which require oral hearings and, in order to be fair to all appellants, they are dealt with in strict chronological order. In the context of dealing with the considerable number of appeals now on hands, the Department has made a further nine additional appointments to the office in recent weeks. While every effort is being made to deal with the large numbers awaiting oral hearing as quickly as possible, it is not possible to give a date for when the person’s oral hearing will be heard, but he or she will be informed when arrangements have been made. The Social Welfare Appeals Office functions independently of the Minister for Social Protection and of the Department and is responsible for determining appeals against decisions on social welfare entitlements.

Services for People with Disabilities 124. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Social Protection if there is any scheme in place within his or any Department to allow a person with a disability to receive a placement of work experience when it is the recommendation of Rehab that a person be placed in a work environment to build their confidence and give them a sense of responsibility. [12101/11]

Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Joan Burton): In the absence of specific information, it is assumed the question refers to a person with a disability who is leaving the National Rehabilitation Hospital in Dún Laoghaire and seeking to return to the open labour market. In such circumstances, the person with a disability should register with his or her nearest FÁS Employment Service Office for a vocational guidance interview. These offices are the gateway for all FÁS services. The listings and locations are available on the FÁS website, www.fas.ie.I will set out the options available for consideration. There are vocational training programmes for people with disabilities who wish to return to the open labour market. Work experience is an integral part of these programmes. Alternatively, if the person is job-ready and seeking employment, he or she should consider the FÁS Supported Employment Programme, which covers job-seeking and support a by Job Coach in securing employment and support in the workplace. In addition, the Work Placement Programme provides a nine-month work experi-

771 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Joan Burton.] ence opportunity. It offers the participant the opportunity to gain on-the-job work experience while retaining his or her Social Welfare entitlement. All of the above are available through FÁS Employment Services. The onus is on the individual to engage directly with them.

Departmental Staff 125. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport the reason persons (details supplied) are only being offered two month contracts which is at variance with their previous experience when they were offered eight and nine month contracts in previous years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11974/11]

Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport (Deputy Jimmy Deenihan): The Deputy will be aware that in line with the Government’s drive to restore the public finances and reduce the budget deficit, all Departments have been asked to achieve a progressive reduction in staff numbers and payroll costs by implementing Employment Control Frameworks. In this regard, the Department of Finance now sets the numbers of temporary staff, referred to by the Deputy in the details supplied, that may be employed each month of the year. In line with the above stated Government policy to reduce public sector employment costs, I am advised that it has not been possible to offer the same number of contracts or contracts of the same duration as in previous years to the persons referred to by the Deputy in the details supplied. It should be noted that while some of the contracts offered to such persons have been offered for shorter periods than in previous years, my Department is committed to ensuring the most effective use of all its staffing resources across the country and also to ensuring delivery of the best possible services to the public within the confines of reduced budgets and funding. My Department will keep the staffing situation referred to by the Deputy under review.

Turbary Rights 126. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport if he will facilitate the domestic peat turf cutters on the proposed new peat council recently established by him; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12103/11]

Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport (Deputy Jimmy Deenihan): I have endeavoured to ensure representation on the Peatlands Council for domestic peat cutters through the participation of the Irish Farmers Association, the Turf Cutters and Contractors Association and Irish Rural Link. The input of peat cutters will play an important role in the work of the Council. It is open to them to make an input into the deliberations of the Council through the organisations mentioned above or through direct contact with the Council. The Council may be contacted by writing to The Secretary, Peatlands Council, 7 Ely Place, Dublin 2, by e-mail at peatland- [email protected] or by telephone at 01 8883207.

Bog Fires Compensation 127. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he intends that Bord Na Móna would accept liability for damage done to neighbouring properties during recent fires that originated on Bord Na Móna property; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11935/11]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Pat Rabbitte): The matter in question is not one in which I have a function but is a day-to-day operational matter for the company. I have been advised by Bord na Móna that it continues to work closely with

772 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers the local community and the fire service to prevent bog fires, protect property and reduce future risk.

Broadcasting Services 128. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if TV3 and TG4 are paying RTÉ NL in respect of their services on Saorview the digital terrestrial television service; if TV3 will be available on Saorview throughout its initial launch; if he has directed TV3 to appear on Saorview under its licence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11969/11]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Pat Rabbitte): It is the responsibility of my Department — in conjunction with RTÉ, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI), ComReg and other stakeholders — to progress the digital switch-over process so that it meets the 2012 timeline for analogue switch-off. Accordingly, the then Minister imposed by order a requirement on RTÉ to make its public service digital terrestrial television (DTT) multiplex available to 90% of the population from 31 October 2010. On 29 October, RTÉ launched the DTT service (called Saorview) to over 90% of the population on a pilot basis. RTÉ considered that a pilot phase was essential to provide for the roll-out of the network nationally, to test new content and to allow for technical testing. In addition, it considered that this period could be used to develop additional content and services and to ensure the availability of a variety of Saorview-approved receivers prior to the national launch. Due to the nature of this pilot phase, it was considered appropriate that TG4, TV3 and other third party broadcasters would not be charged for DTT services during this period. However, broadcasters including TV3 and TG4 will be required to pay for DTT services on the RTÉ digital network thereafter. The pilot network is available to the public and currently broadcasts RTÉ 1, RTÉ 2, TG4, TV3, 3e and two test services — RTÉ News Now and an RTÉ digital teletext service. RTÉ is proposing a full national launch in the second quarter of 2011. Further information on the RTÉ DTT service is available on www.saorview.ie. TV3 is the national commercial TV broadcaster and is licensed under contract with the BAI. This contract provides for TV3 to be carried on the analogue terrestrial TV network which is operated by RTÉ NL. Part 8 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 also provides for the Minister, at the request of the BAI, to make space available for TV3 on the RTÉ digital network. The BAI made such a request on behalf of TV3 in 2010 and TV3 was facilitated with space on the RTÉ digital network for both TV3 and 3e, which is owned by TV3. While a decision to use the RTÉ digital network is ultimately a commercial decision for TV3, I consider that TV3’s request for space on the digital network is a positive indication of its continued interest in national broadcasting in Ireland and a clear signal of its intent in this regard.

Departmental Programmes 129. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the specific spending programmes and amounts which are involved in achieving the €11 million savings mentioned in the jobs initiative. [12009/11]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Pat Rabbitte): An additional €30 million in funding was provided for the National Energy Retrofitting Programme by the Minister for Finance in the Jobs Initiative announced on Tuesday 10th May 2011. This funding comprises of an additional €19 million in Exchequer Funding with the balance of €11 million being provided from savings within my Department’s existing capital allocation.

773 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.]

The specific spending programmes and amounts which are involved in achieving the €11m savings are as follows:

High Speed Schools’ Broadband Programme: €3m

Postcodes Programme: €2m

Ocean Energy Programme: €6m.

Given the time of the year and the stage of progression of each of the above programmes/ projects, these monies will not be required in these areas this year.

Special Housing Needs 130. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the reasons a Health Service Executive, HSE, initiative has not obtained its full potential (details supplied); if a board of directors is in place for the project or is it the responsibility of the HSE to control the units; if not, if he will ensure this aspect is addressed and that the potential of the project is fully realised; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11903/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): Under my Department’s Capital Assistance Scheme (CAS) funding of up to 100% of the approved cost of accommodation is provided for accommodation by approved housing bodies for people with special housing needs. My Department’s involvement with the voluntary and co-operative housing schemes relates primarily to the provision of funds for individual projects. Funding of €292,039 was provided under the CAS in 1989 towards the cost of twelve units of accommodation for older persons by Athy Voluntary Housing Association at Saint Vincent’s Hospital in Athy, Co. Kildare. Approved housing bodies may be constituted as limited companies, societies registered with the Registrar of Friendly Societies or as trusts incorporated under the Charities Acts. Each body must have a properly functioning governing body, board of directors or trustees which is responsible for the proper management and maintenance of dwellings provided under the terms of CAS and for the operation of letting policies and compliance with all relevant statutory requirements. It is a matter for the local authority, in this instance Kildare County Council, to ensure that the housing body is managing and maintaining the scheme in accordance with the terms of the CAS.

Community Development 131. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government further to Parliamentary Question No. 21 of 14 April 2011 and the subsequent supplementary responses (details supplied), if he will outline the progress made to date in resolving the issues between the two Departments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12013/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): The European Commission has confirmed that support/grant aid for adding value to agrifood products is not eligible under Axis 3 of the Rural Development Programme (RDP). Basic agricultural products are listed in Annex 1 to the EC Treaty and are commonly called Annex

774 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

1 products. Under the main Rural Development Regulation 1698/2005 support/grant aid for adding value to Annex 1 products is facilitated under Axis 1 of the programme. As a result of this, grant aid under Axis 3 of the RDP for this type of activity has been suspended. My Department and the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food are currently working together with the support of the European Commission to resolve the issue, and discussions are ongoing with a view to reaching a solution as soon as possible.

Departmental Contracts 132. Deputy Regina Doherty asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the basis on which employment will be awarded to persons who are qualified to install water meters; the basis on which contracts will be awarded to companies who operate to install water meters; if employment will be awarded through local authorities or put out to tender for construction companies; and when employment is likely to commence in this area. [12015/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): The Programme for Government provides for the introduction of a fair funding model to deliver clean and reliable water. The objective is to install water meters in individual households and move to a charging system based on usage above a free allowance. My Department is currently preparing a strategy to implement these proposals, including the necessary procurement process for purposes of the purchase and installation of the meters and I will be making further details available following Government consideration of the proposals. It is likely that the installation of meters will commence early in 2012. The capital intensive nature of the installation of water meters to over one million households should offer significant employment potential. It is estimated that the metering programme could sustain between 1,200 and 1,800 jobs between 2012 and 2014 when the bulk of the works will be carried out.

Election Management System 133. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he intends to fulfil the previous Government’s commitment to dispose of the 7,000 e-voting machines; if so, the date of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11916/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): I refer to the reply to Question No. 76 of 17 May 2011 which outlined the position in this matter.

Smokeless Fuels 134. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the position regarding the use of smokeless fuels in areas (details supplied) in County Wicklow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11917/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): The Air Pollution Act, 1987 (Marketing, Sale & Distribution of Fuels) Regulations, 1998 to 2004, prohibit the marketing, sale and distribution of bituminous, or smoky, coal within certain designated restricted areas, in order to protect air quality in urban areas. The Regulations are enforced by the local authorities. Fuel suppliers who breach the ban are liable for prosecution. The bituminous coal ban has been gradually extended since it was first introduced and now applies in sixteen towns and cities around the country. These are as follows:

775 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Phil Hogan.]

• Dublin City and County since 1990

• Cork City since 1995

• Arklow, Drogheda, Dundalk, Limerick City and Wexford Town since 1998

• Celbridge, Galway City, Leixlip, Naas and Waterford City since 2000

• Bray, Kilkenny, Sligo and Tralee since 2003.

Air quality monitoring carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) shows that the ban has reduced pollutant emissions very significantly in areas where it has been applied. Reductions of black smoke emissions range from a minimum of 45% in the smaller cities and towns to a high of 70% in Dublin. This has resulted in greatly improved ambient air quality in these areas with consequent health benefits. The EPA also publishes a comprehensive annual report on air quality, the most recent being the report “Air Quality in Ireland 2009 — Key Indicators of Ambient Air Quality (November 2010)”. In this report the EPA found that levels of particulate matter in smaller towns outside the existing ban areas can be similar or worse than those in cities. The EPA has recommended an extension of the ban to additional areas in order to deliver further improvements to air quality. This recommendation will be considered as part of a consultation on improvements to the smoky coal ban which I intend to undertake in the coming months.

Water and Sewerage Schemes 135. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the criteria to be used to prioritise water and sewerage schemes in County Kildare in the next 12 months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11925/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): The Water Services Investment Programme 2010-2012 includes details of the contracts to commence in County Kildare, and nationally, over the period 2010 to 2012, as well as schemes to advance through planning in this period. A copy of the Programme is available in the Oireachtas library. The specific environmental and economic pressures that have informed priorities and project selection in the Programme are:

• Water conservation proposals which meet environmental and economic goals;

• Environmental objectives including works required to respond to:

— Judgments of the European Court of Justice;

— Environment and Public Health Objectives arising, for example, from environmental regulation in respect of drinking water standards, wastewater treatment standards, wastewater discharge authorisations, bathing water standards, Pollution Reduction Programme for Shellfish Waters, fresh water pearl mussel plans, etc; and

— Compliance with the Water Framework Directive requirements,

• Projects which support economic development and employment creation.

776 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

My Department is currently undertaking an annual review of the Programme. There are two components to this review: a review of progress of all schemes and contracts currently in the Programme, and following that a consideration of the need for any reprioritisation of contracts and schemes, including addressing issues which have emerged since the Programme was published and which require an urgent response. The current scale of the published Programme was set in the context of likely available financial resources over the medium term. In light of this, and the short time which has passed since the extensive review undertaken in the development of the Programme, there is only scope for, and should only be a need for, minor adjustments to the Programme at this stage.

136. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the number of group water schemes approved by each local authority in each of the past three years and to date in 2011; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11926/11]

142. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the number of group water and sewerage schemes funded by him in each of the past five years and to date in 2011; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11932/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 136 and 142 together. Responsibility for the administration of the Rural Water Programme, which includes group water and sewerage schemes, has been devolved to local authorities since 1997. The selection and approval of individual group schemes for advancement and funding under the programme, within the overall priorities set by my Department and subject to the block grant allocation provided, is therefore a matter for the local authorities. The information requested may, therefore, be sought from the local authorities.

Local Authority Job Creation 137. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the way in which the local authorities might best assist economic recovery with particular reference to dealing with job creation or retention proposals through the planning system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11927/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): Local authorities play a central role in supporting economic development and enterprise at local level. They do this in a number of ways including through their capital and current budgets, economic planning and development and the provision of goods and services as well as community infrastructure. Business Support Units (or similar arrangements) have been put in place in all county and city councils. These Units provide a dedicated one-stop-shop, and provide information and arrange consultations on a range of issues including planning. Looking ahead, the Programme for Government provides for an expanded role for local authorities in local enterprise and community development. This in turn will assist in maximis- ing the impact of investment to produce jobs at local level. In addition, I will be asking local authorities to do all that they can to reduce rates and other charges which affect businesses. Furthermore, I will be considering how best local authorities can play their part in supporting relevant elements of the Government’s Jobs Initiative.

777 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Local Authority Housing 138. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the total number of local authority houses built by each local authority and occupied by tenants in each of the past three years and to date in 2011; the degree to which it might be possible to increase this number in view of the economic advantages both for the tenant and the national economy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11928/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): Data in relation to social housing starts and completions are published in my Department’s Quarterly Housing Statistics Bulletins while data in relation to lettings are set out in Annual Statistics Bulletins. Copies of each are available in the Oireachtas library and on my Department’s website, www.environ.ie. Data in respect of 2010 and 2011 are not yet available. Notwithstanding the very significant easing of affordability we have seen over the last number of years, the current adverse economic circumstances have impacted on the demand for social housing and the capacity to meet this demand. The straitened resource environment has accelerated the shift away from reliance on programmes of construction and acquisition. The main focus in terms of supports provided by Government will be on meeting the most acute needs, the housing support needs of those unable to provide for their accommodation from own resources. We are committed to responding more quickly and on a larger scale to these needs, including those of older people, through a variety of mechanisms including through increased provision of social housing, continued strong support for special needs provision through the Capital Assistance Scheme and the suite of adaptation grants for older people and people with disabilities. This will necessitate a continuing restructuring of the social housing investment programme to allow for delivery of new social housing through more flexible funding models, to enable us to meet our social housing delivery commitments in the period ahead while protecting, to the greatest extent possible, programmes targeting special needs. The social housing leasing initiative and, in particular, the Rental Accommodation Scheme will each play their part as long term mainstream social housing supports. The Government is also committed to developing other funding mechanisms that will increase the supply of permanent new social housing. Such mechanisms will include options to purchase, build to lease, and the sourcing of loan finance by approved housing bodies, including from the Housing Finance Agency, for construction and acquisition.

Social and Affordable Housing 139. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if and when he will meet with tenants of a housing scheme (details supplied) in County Kildare with a view to facilitating a meeting between the relevant officials of Kildare County Council, his Department and the tenants with the representative of the housing association with a view to addressing the long-standing grievances of the tenants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11929/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): My Department’s involvement with voluntary and co-operative housing schemes relates primarily to the provision of funds for individual projects. The detailed administration of the schemes, and the certification that projects comply with the terms and conditions of the funding schemes, are the responsibility of the local authority.

778 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Approved housing bodies are responsible for the proper management and maintenance of dwellings provided under the terms of the funding schemes and for the operation of letting policies, the fixing of rents and compliance with all relevant statutory requirements. Tenancy matters are generally covered in the terms and conditions of the tenancy agreement between the approved housing body and the tenant, and are broadly based on landlord and tenant legislation. Leim an Bhreadain Voluntary Housing Association currently manage and operate a 32-unit voluntary housing scheme at Sli an Chanail, Easton Road, Leixlip. In accordance with terms of the funding scheme for this project, tenants are required to pay a rent based on the local authority Differential Rents Scheme. Kildare County Council wrote to my Department on 1 March, 2011, to advise that the housing body in question has a six-person Board of Directors in place and that information with regard to rents policy, annual accounts and insurance, as requested by the Council, had been received from the Board. I understand that the Council noted an apparent error in the way rents were determined and this was brought to the attention of the Board of Directors and discussed at a subsequent meeting between representatives of the Board and Kildare County Council. The Council also advised my Department that the Board of Directors agreed to meet individual tenants who had concerns in relation to rent policy and the payment of rent arrears. It is a matter for Kildare County Council to ensure that the housing body is managing and maintaining the housing scheme in accordance with the terms and conditions of the funding scheme. This includes oversight of tenancy arrangements and rents policy. My Department will ask Kildare County Council to review these matters and to report on compliance, by the housing body, with the terms and conditions of the scheme. Given that primary responsibility for the matters in question rests with the local authority a meeting such as suggested would not be appropriate.

Local Authority Housing 140. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the number of occasions on which legal action was taken by each local authority for repossession of houses on foot of loan or tenancy agreements in each of the past three years and to date in 2011; the level of arrears of foot of which such proceedings were taken in each year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11930/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): My Department does not collect information in relation to the number of legal actions taken by local authorities on foot of cases of mortgage arrears. However, information regarding repossession of houses on foot of loan arrears is available. Repossession figures are extremely low for local authority borrowers with only 128 repossessions across all local authority areas carried out in the period 2005-2010. This includes 58 voluntary repossessions or abandonments. In terms of rent arrears my Department collects data on an annual basis from local authorities under section 62 of the Housing Act 1966. In 2008, 553 warrants issued on foot of rent arrears, of which 130 were enforced. In 2009 local authorities sought 598 warrants of which 36 were enforced. Information regarding 2010 and 2011 is not yet available. Local authorities can and do exercise the powers available to them and endeavour in all arrears cases to engage proactively and constructively with a distressed borrower or tenant with

779 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Willie Penrose.] the aim of ensuring that arrears cases are handled in a manner that is sympathetic to the needs of the particular household, while also protecting the position of the local authority concerned.

Water and Sewerage Schemes 141. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the number of major water and or sewerage schemes and the cost throughout the country in each of the past four years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11931/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): The Water Services Investment Programme is a multi-annual investment plan for the provision of major water and sewerage schemes. The current plan, Water Services Investment Prog- ramme 2010-2012, is available in the Oireachtas Library, and sets out the plans for investment in major water services projects. Previous plans are also available in the Oireachtas Library. The publication of the Water Services Investment Programme 2010-2012 followed on from a comprehensive review of water services capital investment requirements including an extensive needs assessment exercise carried out by local authorities. The current programme comprises some 340 contracts to be progressed to construction over the period 2010-2012 with a value of over €1.8 billion and some 190 schemes on which planning work will continue over the period. Exchequer expenditure on water and waste water services for the last 4 years is set out in the table below. The expenditure covers a number of area including planning, construction and final accounts.

Year Total Expenditure Water Services Investment Rural Water Programme Programme

2007 496.7 366.7 130.0 2008 496.4 391.4 105.0 2009 512.0 412.0 100.0 2010 495.0 407.0 88.0

The number of schemes/contracts completed in the last 4 years is set out in the table below. The published programme includes details by location of the schemes completed in the period 2007-2009, contracts in progress at the end of 2009 and contracts to commence over the period 2010 to 2012, as well as schemes to advance through planning in this period.

Completion Year Wastewater Water Supply Total

2007 21 23 44 2008 23 18 41 2009 28 14 42 2010 (contracts) 39 33 72

Question No. 142 answered with Question No. 136.

Emergency Planning 143. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and 780 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Local Government the degree to which the local authorities are programmed to react effectively and expeditiously in emergency situations with particular reference to fire, flooding, chemical pollution or other emergences; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11933/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): For the purposes of the Fire Services Acts 1981 and 2003, city councils, county councils and borough councils are fire authorities. Under the legislation, each fire authority is required to prepare, and as occasion requires revise, a Fire and Emergency Operations Plan. The making of this Plan is a reserved function of the local authority. Inter alia , the Plan sets out the resources, operational procedures and training arrangements in relation to responses to incidents such as fire, flooding, chemical pollution or other emergences. All county and city councils also have effective crisis management arrangements in place in accordance with the Framework for Major Emergency Management which was approved by Government in 2006. Under the Framework, local authorities, An Garda Síochána and the Health Service Executive are designated as the principal emergency response agencies for the country. The Framework sets out common arrangements and structures for front-line public sector emergency management in Ireland, is based on the internationally recognised systems approach and is designed to fit with the ‘all hazards’ approach to emergency management. One of the main purposes of the Framework is to set out the co-ordination mechanisms and working relationships between the various services which make up the front-line emergency response. When the need arises, fire authorities use these procedures, which enable the principal response agencies together with the Defence Forces, Civil Defence and other voluntary agencies, to make and co-ordinate the appropriate response to significant incidents. Individual fire services escalate their response as they deem necessary, and use the generic co-ordination structures to ensure effective inter-agency collaboration where appropriate It is a sound principle that emergency response builds from the local response level of emergency services in the area where the emergency event occurs. As an event unfolds, the response can be escalated, if required, to a regional response. If the situation escalates to an exceptional extent, a whole of Government approach may be initiated, with one of the main objectives being to support the local and regional responses. I believe that we have appropriate and effective planning, co-ordination and implementation systems in place, as demonstrated successfully during the severe cold weather and flooding of 2009 and 2010 and in the response to the Cork Airport tragedy.

Social and Affordable Housing 144. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the provision currently being made to meet the housing requirements of persons whose homes are being repossessed by lending institutions other than local authorities in view of the obligation on the local authorities under the Housing Acts to meet the housing requirements of such persons; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11934/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): The Government is acutely conscious of the difficulties many households are facing in terms of mortgage arrears and our Programme for Government sets out a range of credible and meaningful measures that will help households challenged to meet mortgage commitments.

781 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Willie Penrose.]

However, it is important to note, particularly for households worried about possible repossession, that the level of repossessions in Ireland has actually been quite low. The Central Bank’s quarterly data series on Residential Mortgage Arrears and Repossessions shows that the level of repossession activity in the courts, with respect to the primary residence of borrowers is not high when compared with the scale of mortgage arrears pertaining. For example, the level of home repossessions per hundred thousand mortgages in the UK is over 5 times greater than the Irish rate. It can also be observed that the majority of repossessions taking place are not by way of a court order, rather via voluntary surrenders and abandonments. Repossession is even rarer for local authority borrowers with only 128 repossessions across all local authority areas carried out in the period 2005-2010. Clearly, where repossession does occur it is a last resort and my Department is aware that it generally involves those households in arrears who refuse to engage with the local authority lender. In terms of the social housing supports available for households who have had their homes repossessed and are unable to provide for alternative accommodation from own resources, the Government is committed to responding more quickly and on a larger scale to these and other acute needs. This will necessitate a continuing restructuring of the social housing investment programme to allow for delivery of new social housing through more flexible funding models, in order to enable us to meet our social housing delivery commitments in the period ahead while protecting, to the greatest extent possible, programmes targeting special needs. The social housing leasing initiative and, in particular, the Rental Accommodation Scheme will each play their part as long term mainstream social housing supports. The Government is also committed to developing other funding mechanisms that will increase the supply of permanent new social housing. Such mechanisms will include options to purchase, build to lease, and the sourcing of loan finance by approved housing bodies, including from the Housing Finance Agency, for construction and acquisition.

Recycling Policy 145. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government when an application for funding of a recycling centre (details supplied) in County Wexford will be approved. [11938/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): A letter issued from my Department to the County Council concerned on 6 April 2011 requesting clarification of a number of matters in the application for grant assistance submitted by the Council in respect of this recycling facility. I am awaiting a response from the Council to the issues raised before the matter can be considered further.

Social and Affordable Housing 146. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government when funding for the Ardagh cluid housing scheme at Ministerland, Ardagh, County Limerick will be released; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11962/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): I refer to the reply to Question No 208 of 19 April, 2011, which sets out the position in relation to this matter.

782 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Departmental Funding 147. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the type of assistance and the level of funding, if any, he provides each year to the Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland, the Association of County and City Councils, the Local Authority Members Association (LAMA) and the County and City Man- agers Association; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11985/11]

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan): My Department does not provide any funding or other assistance to the Associations in question.

Social and Affordable Housing 148. Deputy Derek Nolan asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the new housing regulations which came into force this year preclude those with stamp 4 immigration status from joining housing lists and that this in turn means they cannot claim rent allowance in view of the fact that to do so persons must be registered on a housing list; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12008/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): To be eligible for social housing support, a person must have a long- term right to reside in the State, decisions on which are a matter within the responsibility of the Minister for Justice and Equality. My Department has given guidance to authorities on how to assess whether an applicant for housing support has such a long-term right to reside in the State. The latest guidance to local authorities in respect of access to social housing supports for non-Irish nationals, including non-EEA nationals, is set out in my Department’s Circular letter SHIP 2010/19 of 24 September 2010. This guidance was restated in documents issued to housing authorities at the time of commencement of the recent Regulations putting in place a new system of social housing assessment from 1 April 2011, but the advice is not part of the Regulations nor is it affected by them. Generally speaking, a non-EEA national with a Stamp 4 endorsement for at least 5 years is eligible on residence grounds to be considered for social housing support. Eligibility for rent allowance is determined by the Department of Social Protection and is subject to that Department’s separate rules on “habitual residence”.

Departmental Schemes 149. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government further to Parliamentary Question No. 96 of 12 May 2011, if he will provide the breakdown of moneys allocated to each project (details supplied). [12022/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): I refer to the reply to Question No 96 of 12 May, 2011. In terms of the €7 million capital allocation to the former PPP regeneration projects, this funding will be used to support a diverse range of activities and investments reflective of the different stages of each of the projects ranging from planning/design, demolition works, site enabling works and construction as well as property acquisitions to facilitate de-tenanting. Dublin City Council has indicated that the funding will be utilised as follows:

€0.875 million for demolition and site enabling works at St. Michael’s Estate and O’Devaney Gardens;

783 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Willie Penrose.]

€3.5 million for St. Michael’s Estate — Construction of Phase 1;

€2.625 million for relocation of tenants to facilitate future regeneration capital works at O’Devaney Gardens, Dominick Street, St. Theresa’s Gardens, Dolphin House, and Croke Villas.

It is a matter for the City Council to determine the prioritisation and location of the works to be undertaken and to apportion the funding accordingly.

Planning Issues 150. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he will instruct local authorities to relax the regulations in relation to signage being used by businesses to promote their premises or businesses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12040/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): Section 254 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 provides for a licensing system for the placement of various structures and appliances on, under, over or along a public road, including maps for indicating directions or places. This licensing system enables a local authority to exercise control over the placing of structures on roads to prevent traffic hazards arising. The Planning and Development Regulations 2001 prescribe the level of fees to be charged in respect of structures and appliances licensed under Section 254 of the 2000 Act. Schedule 12 of the Regulations prescribes a fee of €630 for an advertisement structure or €50 in the case of an advertisement structure, that is of a fingerpost type not exceeding 1 metre in length, consisting of a direction sign to indicate tourist accommodation. Consideration is being given in my Department to reviewing this matter and the associated fees, in consultation with planning authorities. I am also considering the introduction of an exemption from planning permission for temporary advertisements announcing any local event promoted or carried on for commercial purposes, similar to the existing exemption in place for community-related, non-commercial advertisement, subject to certain conditions and restrictions. Under section 262 of the Planning Act, the making of regulations to introduce such exemptions will require the prior resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas.

Unfinished Housing Developments 151. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if he will consider a better estates scheme to encompass non-council unfinished estate in which residents’ associations have been established; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12043/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): Section 180 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) provides that, where estates have not been completed to the satisfaction of the planning authority and enforcement proceedings have not been commenced within the relevant period, the planning authority must, if requested to do so by the majority of owners, initiate the procedures for taking the estate in charge.

784 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

A further provision was added in the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act 2010 to provide that a planning authority may take in charge an unfinished estate, at the request of the owners of the housing units, at any time after the expiration of the planning permission, in situations where enforcement actions have commenced or where the planning authority consider that enforcement action will not result in the satisfactory completion of the estate by the developer. Planning authorities have also been empowered to take in charge part of an estate or some, but not all, of the facilities in an estate. The decision as whether to take an estate in charge is ultimately one for the elected members of a local authority. A high-level Advisory Group on Unfinished Housing Developments was established in October 2010, following the publication by my Department of a National Housing Development Survey database. The Advisory Group’s Final Report was submitted to me on 6 May. I am currently considering its findings and recommendations and will bring proposed actions and recommendations to Government for approval shortly, with a view to publishing the Report thereafter.

Departmental Programmes 152. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the position regarding funding for the insulations of local authority houses in 2011 (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12044/11]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Willie Penrose): Under my Department’s Social Housing Investment Programme, local authorities are allocated capital funding each year in respect of a range of measures to improve the standard and overall quality of their social housing stock. The programme includes a retrofitting measure aimed at improving the energy efficiency of older apartments and houses. My Department requested local authorities specifically to target vacant dwellings in 2011 with the objective of returning the maximum number of vacant units to productive use at reasonable cost. However, necessary improvement works to occupied houses will continue to be eligible for funding from within the allocations notified to individual authorities. Some €31million is being provided to local authorities in 2011 in respect of their social housing improvement works programmes. An allocation of €425,000 was notified to Longford County Council in respect of this measure. It is a matter for the Council to determine the properties to be selected for improvement in 2011.

Garda Operations 153. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total cost of lifting, checking and sealing manholes and drains and related works in advance of the visit here of Queen Elizabeth II; the projected cost of lifting, checking and unsealing manholes and drains when she leaves the State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12010/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Garda Commissioner is the Accounting Officer for the Garda Vote in accordance with the Garda Síochána Act 2005. I have been informed by the Garda authorities that An Garda Síochána does not maintain a separate record of the costs referred to by the Deputy. In addition, I understand that to seek to provide such a breakdown would involve the expenditure of a significant amount of Garda

785 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] time and resources. In the circumstances I regret that I am not in a position to supply the information the Deputy has requested.

Appointments to State Boards 154. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he intends to include a gender quota in respect of the appointment of chairpersons of State boards; if so, the quota that will be set; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11691/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Programme for Government 2011 — 2016 includes a commitment to take steps to ensure that all State Boards have at least 40 per cent of each gender. Composite data on women’s participation on State Boards during 2010 will be made available to the Government shortly and are expected to show that about 34 per cent of places on Boards were held by women in 2010. However a smaller percentage of women chair these State Boards at present. My colleague, Ms Kathleen Lynch T.D., Minister of State with responsibility for Disability, Older People, Equality and Mental Health is currently chairing a working group which is looking at the advancement of women into leadership and decision-making roles including on State and Corporate Boards. The report of that group will be available in the Autumn and I will consider its findings before making proposals to Government in relation to the introduction of quotas on the appointment of chairpersons.

International Terrorism 155. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he has received a security briefing on the presence of terrorist cells in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11948/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): While I receive regular briefings from the Garda Commissioner on security matters it is not the practice to disclose publicly the details of these briefings. I can assure the Deputy, however, that An Garda Síochána maintains extremely close and regular contact with their international counterparts in relation to a broad range of issues, including security and terrorism related issues and they keep myself and the Government fully informed on any emerging threat or issue in this area.

Question No. 156 answered with Question No. 51.

Crime Levels 157. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total number of crimes committed by category in each of the past five years and to date in 2011; the degree to which the perpetrator was brought to justice in each category; the extent to which he proposes to address any issues arising; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11923/11]

173. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total amount of money taken in the various reported robberies in each of the past three years to date in 2011; the extent to which subsequent action and prosecution was successful including the recovery of moneys stolen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12081/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 157 and 173 together. Following the submission in 2004 of a report and recommendations by an expert group on crime statistics, it was decided that the compilation and publication of crime statistics should

786 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers be taken over by the Central Statistics Office, as the national statistical agency, from An Garda Síochána. The Garda Síochána Act 2005 consequently makes provision for this and the CSO has established a dedicated unit for this purpose. Following the setting up of the necessary technical systems and auditing of the data from which the statistics are compiled, the CSO is now compiling, publishing and responding to queries regarding recorded crime statistics. I have requested the CSO to provide statistics directly to the Deputy. I am informed by the Garda authorities that it is the policy of An Garda Síochána not to disclose the amount of money taken during incidents of robbery. All such incidents, including so-called tiger kidnappings and cash in transit robberies, are investigated and prosecutions taken when warranted. Regular meetings are held between An Garda Síochána and financial institutions to discuss security issues and in particular tiger kidnapping prevention and response protocols. There are response procedures in place for dealing with such incidents, which An Garda Síochána does not disclose as a matter of policy and security. The Programme for Government contains a number of commitments which aim to strengthen the measures available to bring those responsible for committing crime to justice. These commitments include a DNA database which will be established to assist An Garda Síochána in the investigation of serious crimes. I also plan to introduce legislation to strengthen the powers of the Criminal Assets Bureau in relation to forfeiting the proceeds of crime, including drug trafficking and dealing. We are also committed to freeing up Gardaí for front line policing by allocating administrative duties to civilian staff and by reforming case management systems so that Gardaí are not unnecessarily detained in the courts. As well as taking forward as quickly as possible the specific commitments in the justice area in the Programme for Government, I intend to build on the work which has been under way for some time on the preparation of a White Paper on Crime. My ultimate objective is to provide a comprehensive framework for future crime policy, in the form of a National Anti- Crime Strategy. I want to make sure that we, as a community, are best placed to deal with the problem of crime in all its manifestations — not just the challenges we face now, but those likely to emerge in the coming years. In drawing up that Strategy, the White Paper process will mean that we will be able to take measures which are based on a rigorous analysis of what works and take on board a range of ideas from community, expert and voluntary interests.

Garda Strength 158. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if the Garda numbers will continue to be reduced due to retirements and other reasons; the effect this will have on Garda operations in the future; his plans to introduce a Garda recruitment campaign; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11939/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Government’s Programme for National Recovery has set a target for a reduction in the numbers employed in the public service between now and the end of 2015. I will be discussing with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, and my other Cabinet colleagues, the details of how this reduction will be applied across those parts of the public service which I am politically responsible for. I expect that a final decision on this will be taken in the context of the comprehensive review of expenditure currently under way. A decision on when Garda recruitment will recommence will take into account both the target reduction and the rate of retirements from the Garda Síochána.

787 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.]

While there is no getting away from the reality that public expenditure and public service numbers have to be reduced, I am determined, as are all my Cabinet colleagues, that this will be accompanied by real and substantive reform, reform which will make the delivery of public services more efficient and cost-effective. Our Programme for National Recovery recognises that a key objective of this reform is the protection of frontline services, and I regard that as a priority for the Garda Síochána.

Garda Recruitment 159. Deputy Michael McCarthy asked the Minister for Justice and Equality when he expects the Garda Síochána will begin to absorb new recruits into Templemore college, County Tipperary; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11994/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): As the moratorium on Public Service Recruitment continues to apply to An Garda Síochána, no date has been fixed for future intakes into the Garda College or for the commencement of a recruitment competition. A decision on when recruitment will re-commence will take into account the rate of retirement in the Garda Síochána and Government targets for reductions in public service numbers.

Garda Deployment 160. Deputy Alan Farrell asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of gardaí allocated to stations within Dublin north. [12012/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the personnel strength of each Garda Station in the DMR North Division on 30 April 2011, the latest date for which figures are readily available, was as set out in the table hereunder:

Station Strength

Balbriggan 68 Garristown 3 Lusk 7 Rush 5 Skerries 11 Ballymun 121 Dublin Airport 25 Santry 83 Whitehall 45 Coolock 119 Malahide 37 Swords 84 Clontarf 77 Howth 40 Raheny 71

Total 796

The responsibility for the allocation of resources, including personnel, within the Force rests with the Garda Commissioner in consultation with his senior management team. 788 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Garda Transport 161. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will provide one additional public order van and one additional unmarked vehicle for a garda station (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12018/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The detailed allocation of Garda resources, including transport, is a matter for the Garda Commissioner to decide in accordance with his identified operational requirements and priorities. At Divisional level, responsibility for the efficient deployment of Garda vehicles is a matter for the Divisional Officer. I am informed by the Garda authorities that there are currently 11 unmarked vehicles and 2 public order vehicles attached to the Garda station referred to by the Deputy. In addition they have indicated that the current policing arrangements for the area make the optimum use of Garda resources.

Garda Training 162. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the length of time for the advanced driving course, method of entry course and the public order unit training course for the Garda Síochána; his plans to provide additional resources to reduce waiting list delays; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12020/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I am informed by the Garda authorities that a five stage Competency Based Driving (CBD) Programme has been developed in An Garda Síochána and this is in the process of being rolled out at present. CBD Level 4 (Advanced Driving) training is four weeks in duration and there is no waiting list for these courses. Method of Entry training is five days in duration. The courses are delivered on demand and are run on a monthly basis (where possible) to cater for applications. In order to ensure that there is always a cohort of members trained in each Division, candidates are selected on a geographical (Divisional) basis. Public Order Unit Training is six days in duration and courses are delivered at Divisional level. I am further informed that apart from the formulated lists associated with the general planning and administration of courses, no known major issues exist as regards waiting lists for courses.

Proposed Legislation 163. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Justice and Equality when he expects to publish the mental capacity Bill needed for ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities; the other legislative and administrative actions required for ratification; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12023/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Government Legislation Prog- ramme announced on 5 April 2011 indicates that the Mental Capacity Bill is expected to be published in late 2011. The Bill will reform the law on mental capacity taking into account the Law Reform Commission’s Report on Vulnerable Adults and the Law. The Bill will replace the Wards of Court system with a modern statutory framework governing decision-making on behalf of adults who lack capacity. It is the Government’s intention to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) as quickly as possible, taking into account the need to ensure that all necessary legislative and administrative requirements under the Convention are being met. In the case of my Department, this is the enactment of the mental capacity legislation. As the

789 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] Deputy may be aware, Ireland does not become party to treaties until it is first in a position to comply with the obligations imposed by the treaty in question, including the amendment of domestic law as necessary. The ongoing implementation of our National Disability Strategy in many respects already comprehends many of the provisions of the Convention. In addition, the Inter-Departmental Committee on the UNCRPD monitors the remaining legislative and administrative actions required to enable the State to ratify the Convention. The Committee has developed a programme on which work is progressing to address the matters that need to be aligned with the UNCRPD.

Liquor Licensing Laws 164. Deputy Simon Harris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will consider reducing the cost of special exemption orders required by nightclubs from €410 to €200 on the basis that the current charge is a disincentive to nightclubs operating additional nights thus costing jobs and excise and VAT revenues to the State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12064/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): Special exemption orders which permit extended opening hours may be sought from the District Court for special occasions. A special exemption order expires where it extends to any Monday that is not a public holiday at 1.00 a.m., and in other cases at 2.30 a.m. Drinking-up time of 30 minutes is also permitted. The increase in fees applicable to such orders provided for in the District Court (Fees) Order 2008 (SI 202 of 2008) was the first such increase since 2004. The current court fee is €300. While I am aware of the pressures on licensees, there is a need to maintain a balance in this matter and I am satisfied that the current fee is warranted in view of the very considerable costs to the State which arise from late night drinking.

165. Deputy Simon Harris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to amend the licensing system that will govern the opening hours of nightclubs; his views that there could be potential positive tourism benefits to such a move; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12065/11]

166. Deputy Simon Harris asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will expedite the sale of alcohol Bill in order to allow for the early introduction of a nightclub permit in view of the fact that no such definition of a nightclub exists in current legislation; the details of the nightclub permit that is to be introduced as part of the sale of alcohol Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12066/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 165 and 166 together. The Government Legislation Programme provides for publication of the Sale of Alcohol Bill in late 2011. This Bill will update the law relating to the sale, supply and consumption of alcohol on licensed premises by repealing the Licensing Acts 1833 to 2010, as well as the Registration of Clubs Acts 1904 to 2008, and replacing them with provisions more suited to modern conditions. It will include provisions relating to the operation of nightclubs. As regards the contents of the Bill, I intend to consult with relevant interests, including the nightclub sector, before finalising its provisions.

790 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Criminal Prosecutions 167. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of incidents of alleged protection or racketeering reported to the Garda in each of the past three years to date in 2011; the degree to which follow-up action and prosecution took place; the number of prosecutions; the number of such prosecutions that were successful; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12075/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): In the time available it has not been possible for the Garda authorities to provide a report on the matters raised by the Deputy. I will be in further contact with the Deputy as soon as that report is to hand.

Witness Intimidation 168. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of reported instances of intimidation of witnesses in each of the past three years to date in 2011; the action taken arising therefrom; the number of successful prosecutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12076/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1999 makes it an offence to harm or threaten or in any other way intimidate or put in fear another person who is assisting in the investigation by An Garda Síochána of an offence, or is a witness or potential witness or a juror or potential juror in proceedings for an offence, or a member of his or her family, with the intention thereby of causing the investigation or the course of justice to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with. I am informed by the Garda authorities that separate records are not maintained of offences under section 41 as between those directed against witnesses and those directed against jurors. Accordingly, the information available from the Gardaí covers both categories of individuals. The Deputy will appreciate that, of their nature, instances of intimidation of jurors are less likely to come to notice than instances of witness intimidation. The table below shows the position with regard to the number of proceedings commenced and convictions for offences under Section 41 of the 1999 Act for the period from 2008 to 15 May 2011.

Year Proceedings Convictions*

2011 9 0 2010 41 6 2009 31 10 2008 18 5 *Figures provided are provisional and figures will change in the light of the outcome of court proceedings.

The statutory provisions available to counteract jury intimidation reflect the gravity of the offence. The Gardaí rigorously enforce these provisions and, of course, will continue to do so. Further legislative action has being taken in the context of the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 2009, including a significant increase in the penalty following conviction for jury intimidation from up to ten to 15 years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.

Organised Crime 169. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent to which criminals are known to run criminal empires when in prison in each of the past three 791 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[ Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.] years to date in 2011; if precise statistics have been determined in this regard; the action or actions taken or proposed to address the issues; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12077/11]

171. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent, if known, to which organised criminal gangs have access to persons serving prison sentences; if any restrictions can be placed on such activity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12079/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 169 and 171 together. The issues referred to are of great complexity for which there are no easy solutions short of isolation for all prisoners in custody. Clearly this is undesirable, would be counterproductive in many cases and would also be incompatible with human rights principles. As a result of a number of successful cases taken by An Garda Síochána, there are a large number of high ranking members of organised criminal gangs who are now in prison custody. In common with other prisoners, they have a legal entitlement to access to the public by means of, for example, visits, phone calls, letters and court appearances. They also associate with other prisoners on a daily basis on the landings of the prison that they are detained in. The Prison Service is committed to preventing such individuals having an inappropriate influence over prisoners associated with these gangs or indeed other persons in custody or in the community, and is in contact as necessary with An Garda Síochána regarding possible criminal activity within the prisons. Measures taken on a continuous basis include regular targeted searching, placement in high security institutions, screened visits, barring of certain visitors, the use of CCTV and mobile phone detectors, examination and monitoring of mail, close supervision of all visits, metal detectors, the setting up of the Operational Support Group (OSG) and the introduction of drug detection dogs. OSG staff operate in all closed prisons (excluding the Training Unit and Arbour Hill) and perform a number of functions. These include acting as dedicated search teams, being the first respondents to any alarm or incident, the designated control and restraint team for cell removals and relocations and acting as the on call fire pickets. The OSG has the additional responsibility of gathering and collating all intelligence information in the prison, carrying out high profile escorts, assisting the security chief officer in the continuing assessment and improvement of security within the prison. A Drug Detection Dog Unit (Canine Unit) has been established on a national basis and became operational in all prisons in 2009. As of May 10th, the Canine Unit has 26 dog handlers, with 34 trained dogs, consisting of 8 conflict resolution dogs, 3 active dogs, and 23 passive dogs. Conflict resolution teams are available for deployment to any prison on request from the Governor. While I am not in a position, for security reasons, to go into the exact details of all measures being applied to tackle the operation of such criminal gangs, the Deputy can be assured that I am committed to doing everything legally possible to disrupt their activities.

Prison Committals 170. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total number of persons that have served a prison sentence in each of the past three years to date in 2011

792 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers for failure to discharge debt to banks, individuals, companies or State institutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12078/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I can advise the Deputy that a total of 431 persons were committed to prison in the time-frame referred to, as a result of the non- payment of a court ordered debt. It is not possible to provide the full information requested by the Deputy without the manual examination of the numerous records concerned and obviously this would require a disproportionate and inordinate amount of staff time and effort which can not be justified in current circumstances where there are other significant demands on resources. However, a breakdown of the number of persons committed to prison solely for non-payment of debts for each of the years from 2008 to date is set out in the following table:

Year Number of Persons

2011 (as of 16th May) 9 2010 5 2009 162 2008 255

Total 431

Debtor offences comprise a failure to meet loan repayments to banks and other financial institutions, including credit unions, but also include failure to pay maintenance debts, hire purchase agreements or creditor loans. As the Deputy will be aware debt is a civil matter and does not result in a criminal conviction. The Enforcement of Court Orders (Amendment) Act 2009 introduced a provision that a debtor cannot be subject to a committal order if he or she is simply unable to pay a debt. This legislation also provides that the debtor must be present in court and where appropriate shall have an entitlement to seek legal aid. The court must be satisfied that the debtor has the ability to pay but wilfully refuses to and that there are no goods to seize to satisfy the debt. The court may also request the debtor and creditor to seek resolution by mediation. Accordingly, a person can now only be imprisoned in default of a debt as a final resort, where the debtor can afford to pay but wilfully refuses to abide by the court order.

Question No. 171 answered with Question No. 169.

Judicial Appointments 172. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of judicial positions to be filled at District, Circuit or higher court levels; the procedures to be followed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12080/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): There are three judicial vacancies at present; two in the High Court and one in the District Court. The current procedures are set out in the Courts and Court Officers Act, 1995. In accordance with the provisions of section 16(2) of that Act, I have requested the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board to furnish me with the names of those persons it considers suitable for the current vacancies together with the name of each person who has informed the Board of his/her wish to be considered for appointment. Following receipt of the lists from the Board, the Government will nominate persons for appointment by the President. 793 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.]

I should mention that I have asked my Department to examine the judicial appointment procedure and this review is currently in train.

Question No. 173 answered with Question No. 157.

Garda Communications 174. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the extent to which the most modern communication systems are available and fully operational to the Garda Síochána; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12082/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): All radio communications within An Garda Síochána are carried out over the National Digital Radio System (NDRS) which provides a modern and fully secure communications platform for An Garda Síochána. The roll-out of the NDRS to the Garda Síochána commenced in June, 2009. The last phase of the roll-out of the system was completed in March 2011.

Garda Reserve 175. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total number of the Garda Reserve currently available for duty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12083/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the personnel strength of the Garda Reserve on 30 April 2011, the latest date for which figures are readily available, was 761.

Garda Strength 176. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total number of the female membership of the Garda Síochána at each rank level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12084/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the total number of females in An Garda Síochána, broken down by rank on 30 April 2011, the latest date for which figures are readily available, was as set out in the table hereunder:

Rank Strength

Commissioner 0 D/Commissioner 1 A/Commissioner 0 C/Superintendent 4 Superintendent 12 Inspector 25 Sergeant 296 Garda 3,093

Total 3,431

794 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Visa Applications 177. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will review the case of a person (details supplied). [12088/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): The Short-Stay Visa Waiver Prog- ramme provides for visa-free travel to Ireland for the holders of UK visas from certain countries. The Waiver Programme is aimed at people on short trips to the UK who might wish to also visit Ireland and it is expected to cover mainly tourists and business people from the countries concerned. It is also intended to introduce procedures which could cater for, insofar as is possible, citizens of the countries concerned who are long term residents of the UK and who wish to visit Ireland for short stays such as business or tourism and who present an insig- nificant risk of irregular migration. The Waiver Programme will be introduced on a pilot basis from 1 July of this year to October 2012 (to cover London Olympics period and beyond). This start date is based on enacting secondary legislation (by way of Statutory Instrument) to define the categories of people covered by the Waiver Programme. The pilot programme will be monitored throughout its running and is capable of being amended or expanded at any point. In relation to the specific case referred to by the Deputy, there are no plans at present to include nationals of the country in question in the pilot scheme. However, in the circumstances outlined by the Deputy, the person in question may well be advised to consider exercising their entitlements to travel throughout the EU as a family member of an EU citizen.

Prison Commitals 178. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the total number of jail sentences imposed in lieu of non-payment of debt in each of the past five years to date in 2011; the number of persons imprisoned on foot of same; if the liability arose from lending institutions, the Revenue Commissioners or others; the extent of which more than one sentence was imposed or served on foot of the same or subsequent liability; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12102/11]

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter): As the Deputy will be aware debt is a civil matter and does not result in a criminal conviction. The Enforcement of Court Orders (Amendment) Act 2009 introduced a provision that a debtor cannot be subject to a committal order if he or she is simply unable to pay a debt. This legislation also provides that the debtor must be present in court; he or she is entitled to seek legal aid; the court must be satisfied that the debtor has the ability to pay but wilfully refuses to and that there are no goods to seize to satisfy the debt. The court may also request the debtor and creditor to seek resolution by mediation. Therefore, a person can now only be imprisoned in default of a debt as a final resort, where the debtor can afford to pay but wilfully refuses to abide by the court order. The number of persons imprisoned in each of the past 5 years is set out in a table. It should be noted that imprisonment does not extinguish an outstanding debt.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Total debtors imprisoned 194 201 255 162 5 9

The Courts Service has advised that details of the creditors who brought the proceedings and the extent to which more than one sentence was imposed for the same debt liability can only be retrieved by way of a manual examination of each individual court record. As I am sure the 795 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy Alan Shatter.] Deputy will appreciate, this would require the expenditure of a disproportionate amount of staff time and resources and it is therefore not possible to provide the level of detail sought.

Naval Service Vessels 179. Deputy Paudie Coffey asked the Minister for Defence his plans to re-instate the sail- training programme Coiste an Asgard; if he has considered replacing the Asgard II sailing vessel which sank off the coast of France on 11 September 2008; if he has received an insurance payment for the vessel following its sinking; if so, the purpose for which the insurance payment was used; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11921/11]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): The position is that the previous Government decided in the context of settling the Estimates for the Department of Defence for 2010 that the national sail training scheme operated by Coiste an Asgard would be discontinued as recommended in the Report of the Special Group on Public Service Numbers and Expenditure. As a result, the sum of €3.8m representing the insured value of Asgard II was transferred to the Department of Finance as Extra Exchequer Receipts.

180. Deputy Paudie Coffey asked the Minister for Defence his plans to invest in new vessels for use by the Naval Service to protect Irish waters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11922/11]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): Following a two-stage tender competition a contract was awarded in October 2010 to the preferred bidder, Babcock Marine in the UK for the provision of two new Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) for the Naval Service. Preparations for the construction of these new vessels have commenced and the first new vessel is scheduled for delivery in early 2014. The second vessel will follow one year later. The acquisition of these modern new vessels, combined with a continuous process of refurbishment and repair, will ensure that the operational capability of the Naval Service is maintained at a satisfactory level.

Irish Red Cross 181. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the current vice chairman of the Irish Red Cross intends to go forward for another term on the board of that organisation at its council meeting of 25 May 2011 next bringing his total service to date on the board to 20 years; if he considers this is compatible with best practice governance guidelines especially with regard to board rotation and renewal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12024/11]

182. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Defence in view of impending new legislation and a new constitution for the Irish Red Cross, he will consider asking the current long serving vice chairman of the IRC to follow the example set by the former distinguished chairman and step down and not go forward for election this year in order to allow for a new start for the Red Cross in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12025/11]

184. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Defence if he will consider incorporating specific term limits for members of the executive committee of the Red Cross into any new proposed Red Cross legislation; if he will consider including the concept of retrospection that is previous service being taken into account for any new members of the executive committee going forward; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12027/11]

796 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): I propose to take Questions Nos. 181 to 184, inclusive, together. My Department is engaged in consultations with the Office of the Attorney General on the extent of changes that can be made to the Irish Red Cross Order 1939. Following receipt of legal advice from the Office of the Attorney General, which is expected in the coming weeks, I will review the legislative changes that are proposed and consider bringing them to Govern- ment for approval. Amongst the issues that will be considered will be the question of introducing mandatory breaks in service. With regard to the Deputy’s Question concerning the term of Board members and best practice governance guidelines, I have commenced an exchange with the Society concerning governance matters.

Irish Red Cross 183. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Defence the progress made in filling the vacancy for a Government nominee to the central council of the Irish Red Cross; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12026/11]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): As I indicated in my recent answer to a similar question (PQ No. 8253/11 refers), my Department has been informed of the resignation, for personal reasons, of one of the previous Government’s nominees to the Central Council of the Irish Red Cross Society. I am now considering how this vacancy might be filled and I will make a decision on the matter shortly.

Question No. 184 answered with Question No. 181.

Army Barracks 185. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Defence if he will provide an update on plans for the future of Connolly Barracks, Longford; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12041/11]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): Longford County Council have expressed some interest in acquiring Connolly Barracks. Discussions with the Council are ongoing with officials from my Department. In the event of these discussions not reaching a satisfactory outcome this property will be disposed of taking account of the market conditions, so as to maximise the return to the Defence Forces and generate funding for reinvestment in Defence Forces equipment and infrastructure.

Departmental Expenditure 186. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Defence the planned military budget for 2011. [12091/11]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): The total gross provision for the Defence Vote (Vote 36) for 2011 is €725.5m. €1.5m in respect of capital supply services was also carried over from 2010 to 2011. The gross provision in the Defence Vote for military expenditure is €694.9m, which provides for pay and allowances and capital and current costs relating to the Defence Forces. The Defence Vote also includes an administrative allocation of €23.2m and provides for funding of €7.4m for other services (Grants-in-Aid, etc). A full breakdown of the Vote is available in the published Estimates for 2011.

797 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Defence Forces Equipment 187. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Defence the planned military purchases for 2011. [12092/11]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): Investment in new equipment for the Defence Forces is provided for under various Subheads of the Defence Vote relating to defensive equipment, mechanical transport, aircraft, Naval Service ships and stores, communications and Infor- mation Technology equipment. The provision for defensive equipment for 2011 will allow, inter alia, for the acquisition of a range of equipment, e.g. Chemical Detection Equipment, Body Armour, Force Protection Equipment, Rifle enhancement, Communication Equipment etc. in order to maintain the Defence Forces capabilities. The provision for ammunition in 2011 is circa €16m. This will cover the acquisition of a range of different ammunition types necessary to maintain stocks given the training and overseas requirement throughout the year. One of the most significant allocations provided for this year, and which will be required in the coming years, relates to the Naval Service subhead which provides for the development and provision of two new Off Shore Patrol vessels, the first of which is to be delivered in 2014.The priority this year is on maintaining the capability of the Defence Forces to deliver effective services across all of the roles assigned by Government.

Departmental Bodies 188. Deputy Paschal Donohoe asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will privatise Coillte; and if he has any plans to sell the leaseholds for trees in State ownership. [11970/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): Coillte was one of 28 commercial state bodies reviewed by the Review Group on State Assets and Liabilities, chaired by Colm McCarthy, which reported recently. The Government is now considering the findings of the Report and its recommendations in detail. However, no decision has yet been taken by the Government about the future of Coillte.

Fishing Quotas 189. Deputy Anne Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his plans to relax the current quotas for Irish persons fishing in Irish waters; if he will re-examine the criminality issue pertaining to this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11910/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): The annual Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and annual national quotas are established each year at the December EU Fisheries Council. The management of Ireland’s fish quotas is determined at national level in close association with industry representatives. My Departments meet industry representatives on a monthly basis to review whitefish quota uptake and bring forward proposals for allocations to vessel owners on a monthly basis. The recommendations are generally robust and take account of the issues for the industry as a whole and, in most cases, I am able to adopt these recommendations. Pelagic quotas are allocated based on policy in place which is reviewed and amended as required in full consultation with industry. The Programme for Government has committed to replacing the criminal sanctions system for minor fisheries offences with administrative sanction system to bring Ireland into line with other European jurisdictions.

798 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

I have requested the advice of the Attorney General on the implementation of the Govern- ment commitment. Any amendment to provide for such a system would be included in the planned amendment to the Sea Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act, 2006 which is required to provide for the EU obligation to implement a penalty points system for the masters of vessels in respect of serious infringements of the Common Fisheries Policy rules, in accordance with the provisions of EU Council Regulation 1224/2009.

Grant Payments 190. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a sheep subsidy will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Wexford. [11940/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): While an application under the 2010 Grassland Sheep Scheme was received from the person named on the 23 April 2010, no payment is due, as, while the closing date for submission of the annual Sheep Census was 9 April, the Sheep Census of the person named was only submitted on 18 May 2010.

191. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if an official from his Department will contact a person (details supplied) in County Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11960/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): An official from my Department has been in direct contact with the person named and has provided clarification relating to the Suckler Cow Welfare Scheme and to the National Reserve of the Single Pay- ment Scheme.

192. Deputy Paudie Coffey asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a grant that has been approved to a person (details supplied) in County Waterford under the agri-environment options scheme will be paid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11976/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): The person named has been approved for the AEOS scheme with a start date of 1 September 2010. Under the EU Regulations governing the Agri-Environment Options Scheme and other area-based payment schemes, a comprehensive administrative check, including cross-checks with the Land Parcel Identification System, must be completed before any payment can issue. I expect that payments to participants in the scheme in respect of the first year will commence in August and that payments in respect of year two will commence in October.

193. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will receive their suckler cow grant payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11979/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): The person named registered 20 animals under the 2010 Suckler Welfare Scheme. The validation process in respect of eleven animals has been completed and payment will issue shortly. The person named has not submitted details of the required scheme measures for the remaining animals. No payment can be made to the applicant until this information is submitted to my Department and has been found, during validation checks, to comply with the terms and conditions of the scheme.

799 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

194. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will receive their REP scheme payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11993/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): The person named commenced REPS 4 in April 2008 and has received full payment in respect of both years 1 and 2. Following an inspection on 15 December 2010, penalties totalling 65% of the third year payment were imposed. An appeal dated 25 January 2011 was received. My officials informed the person named by letter on 12 May 2011 that their appeal had been partially successful with the penalty now reduced to 35%. The person named has leave to appeal this decision to the Agricultural Appeals Office within three months, if they so wish. My officials are currently processing the third-year payment application and provided all administrative checks are passed, payment will issue at the earliest possible date.

195. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a REP scheme 4 payment will issue to a person (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12017/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): The person named commenced REPS 4 in January 2010. A new REPS 4 plan correcting errors on the original plan was received on 16 March 2011. All the required checks have now been completed on this amended plan and payment will issue within ten working days.

196. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when overdue payment will be made under the agri-environment options scheme for 2010 in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Longford. [12036/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): Under the EU Regu- lations governing the Agri-Environment Options Scheme and other area-based payment schemes, a comprehensive administrative check, including cross-checks with the Land Parcel Identification System, must be completed before any payment can issue. I expect that payments to participants in the scheme in respect of the first year will commence in August and that payments in respect of year two will commence in October.

Departmental Staff 197. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will rectify an error made regarding the rightful position on the panel of candidates for promotion, which was denied due to an error made by the interview board in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Longford; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12067/11]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney): The individual to whom the Deputy refers competed in an internal promotion competition in 2006. Initially an error was made by the interview board when listing the successful candidates. This error was subsequently corrected and the individual in question was placed on the panel of successful candidates in advance of any post being offered to the panel.

Health Services 198. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Health and Children when an assessment of a person (details supplied) will be undertaken. [11899/11]

800 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Kathleen Lynch): As the Deputy’s question relates to service matters, I have referred this question to the Health Service Executive for direct reply.

Departmental Funding 199. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will, recog- nising the great service an organisation (details supplied) provides, ensure that such funding will be provided on a regular basis into the years ahead; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12086/11]

Nursing Education 200. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will reverse the pay cut imposed without consultation or agreement on fourth year undergraduate nurses and midwives undertaking rostered clinical placements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12126/11]

224. Deputy Derek Nolan asked the Minister for Health and Children the status of the review of the elimination of payments to fourth year student nurses; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12007/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): I propose to take Questions Nos. 200 and 224 together. I have approved a review of the decision to abolish payments to student nurses during their fourth-year pre-registration rostered placement. The nursing unions have been invited to contribute to the review process. My Department has advised the unions that submissions will be accepted up to 3 June 2011.

Accident and Emergency Services 201. Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will confirm the numbers waiting for admission in hospital accident and emergency departments and for primary care teams; and the contact that he has had with the Health Service Executive regarding these figures. [11305/11]

202. Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Minister for Health and Children his views that the figures provided by the Health Service Executive in regard to the number of patients on trolleys in accident and emergency departments in hospitals has been understated; the action he will take to have this matter investigated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11708/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): I propose to take Questions Nos. 201 and 202 together. The most widely available information on waiting times in Emergency Departments relates only to those who have been assessed as in need of admission. These “trolley wait” figures provide an important snapshot but they exclude patients who do not require admission. The INMO and the HSE have been publishing trolley wait figures at different times and using different methodologies. As a first step, I have decided that the basis on which the INMO has

801 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy James Reilly.] been producing the snapshot figures is one that we should use from now on. These figures will be validated by Nurse Managers in Emergency Departments and bed managers within each hospital. The next step is to collect full waiting time data for all patients, whether admitted or not, from time of registration at an ED, to time of discharge or admission. The HSE is working intensively to put this data system in place. The target we are working to achieve is that all patients will be treated and discharged or admitted as required, within 6 hours of arrival at an ED. In order to help make sure that happens, I am establishing a Special Delivery Unit (SDU) to improve access to the emergency and elective care system. The SDU is a Government priority and as such is included in the Programme for Government 2011-2016, to be achieved within the first 100 days. Extensive work is currently being undertaken in designing the Unit, which will be modelled, in part, on the successful special delivery unit in Northern Ireland which substantially reduced waiting lists over two to three years. The difficulties in our Emergency Departments must be addressed on the basis of a health wide approach. I believe that Primary Care Teams are capable of safely dealing with a number of the cases that present at our Emergency Departments. The development of Primary Care Teams and Primary Care Services is a priority under the Programme for Government. The aim is to provide the maximum possible in health and social care in local communities and this will be achieved by increasing activity in the primary care setting and the redirecting of services away from acute hospitals to the community.

Primary Care Strategy 203. Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will confirm the number of primary care centres and units established under the primary care plan of the Health Service Executive; the recent contact that he has had with the HSE in regard to this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11711/11]

228. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Health and Children the steps he has taken since coming into office to progress the implementation of the primary care strategy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12060/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): I propose to take Questions Nos. 203 and 228 together. The development of Primary Care Teams and Primary Care Services is a priority under the Programme for Government. The aim is to provide up to 95% of health and social care in local communities and this will be achieved by increasing activity in the primary care setting and the redirecting of services away from acute hospitals to the community. The Health Service Executive (HSE) has responsibility for the development of Primary Care Centres in line with the Primary Care Strategy. It is the HSE’s plan that the majority of Primary Care Centres will be provided by the private sector through leasing agreements. In this context, the Executive has developed a generic design model for Primary Care Centres, with accommodation for up to three Primary Care Teams per centre. It is the HSE’s intention to deliver up to 200 Primary Care Centres using this leasing strategy. The HSE states that, to date, 32 Primary Care Centres are complete and in operation. 16 of these have opened under the leasing arrangement, accommodating 23 Primary Care Teams.

802 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Primary Care Centres in disadvantaged urban and small rural towns / isolated areas will continue to be funded from the Exchequer. In accordance with the Primary Care Strategy, modern, well-equipped primary care centres will be central to the effective functioning of Primary Care Teams (PCTs). The centres will allow multidisciplinary services, provided by GPs, nurses, physiotherapists, occupational thera- pists and others, to be made available on a single site, providing a single point of access for the user and will encourage closer coordination between providers. The new centres will greatly assist in the provision of modern services, in particular the provision of chronic disease management by multi-disciplinary teams. The criteria for the location of PCTs include population size; availability of GPs in local areas; existing General Medical Services (GMS) patterns and the location of existing and proposed Primary Care Centres. There are significant variations across the PCTs in terms of their stage of development and the number of clinical team meetings held, the number of patients discussed and the number of Patient Care Plans agreed. It is a key priority for this Government that all PCTs are fully functional. I have met with the HSE on a number of occasions in recent weeks and have asked HSE officials to make significant progress on this issue over the next 12 months.

General Medical Services Scheme 204. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Health and Children if his attention has been drawn to the charging by general medical practitioners under the general medical scheme of medical card patients for routine blood samples; if this is in line with the GP contracts; if he will allow this practice to continue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11891/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): Under the General Medical Services (GMS) contract, a general practitioner (GP) is expected to provide his/her patients who hold medical cards or GP visit cards with all proper and necessary treatment of a kind generally undertaken by a GP. Where blood tests form part of the investigation and necessary treatment of patients’ symptoms or conditions, these should be provided free of charge to medical card and GP visit card holders. The HSE points out that, in many GP surgeries, it is the practice nurse who takes blood samples. The HSE significantly subsidises the cost of employing practice nurses. I would be most concerned if it were to emerge that GMS patients are being charged inappropriately by GP contractors. If the HSE is made aware of any such cases, it will arrange to have them investigated as appropriate. A report has been requested from the Primary Care Unit Managers in the HSE on the extent of complaints received and the status of same.

Health Services 205. Deputy Pat Deering asked the Minister for Health and Children the structure he is putting in place to replace the transport system that has ceased, in order to ensure that elderly persons with no transport can get to various medical clinics around the country. [11895/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): There must be a clear national approach to non-emergency transport which, where provided, should be in the most cost-effective way and with clear conditions. The HSE is developing a national policy which is focused on addressing, consistently, the eligibility and affordability of patient transport services across the country, as well as achieving the €15m in savings recommended in the McCarthy Report. This policy is almost complete and

803 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy James Reilly.] I will be considering its implications once it has been made available to my Department in the coming weeks.

General Medical Services Scheme 206. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) who has a medical card is now required to pay the chemist for their B12 injections; the person who receives the €7 per injection charge; if general practitioners are paid to administer such injections; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11901/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): There are two licensed intramuscular vitamin B preparations available on the Irish market. Both are reimbursed under the GMS and community drugs schemes. Supply difficulties have been experienced for both of these products. In March 2010 the HSE put in place arrangements to reimburse the costs of both licensed products and equivalent products not licensed for the Irish market. GMS patients should not be charged by their pharmacists for these products. I would be most concerned if it were to emerge that GMS patients have been charged inappropriately by community pharmacy contractors. If the HSE is made aware of the details of such cases it will arrange to have them investigated as appropriate. Under the General Medical Services (GMS) contract, a general practitioner (GP) is expected to provide his/her patients who hold medical cards or GP visit cards with all proper and necessary treatment of a kind generally undertaken by a GP.

Health Services 207. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will give consideration to proposals by a group (details supplied) regarding the reorganisation of diabetes paediatric services in eight networks, one of which would serve more than 1,100 children with diabetes in counties Dublin, Kildare and Wicklow in order that intensive therapies can be assessed with greater ease locally; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11906/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): The information sought by the Deputy is not readily available. However, I have asked the Health Service Executive to supply this information to me and I will forward it to the Deputy as soon as possible.

208. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children if his attention has been drawn to the shortfalls of current paediatric diabetes services, the proposed policy document by Diabetes Action, if there are any immediate plans to re-organise paediatric diabetes services in the Dublin mid-Leinster area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11924/11]

209. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children the way policy is determined in the Health Service Executive in County Kildare with particular reference to changes in the deployment of services such as the dental service at Carbury; if his attention has been drawn to the gradual centralisation of services in larger urban areas to the detriment of services that have existed for generations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11936/11]

804 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): The HSE must ensure the most efficient and effective use of staff and resources and the highest level of patient safety. In providing dental services to schoolchildren in Co. Kildare the HSE is obliged to take into account external standards to maximise patient safety, for example HIQA standards for infection control. The HSE plans opening a new dental clinic in Naas, which will meet these high standards. Any relocation of services by the HSE will be done to ensure the maintenance of the highest standards and the best outcomes for patients.

Hospitals Building Programme 210. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Health and Children if he has made an assessment of the impact on plans for the new children’s hospital following the resignation of the chief executive officer of the projects development board; his proposals to deal with this new situation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11944/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): I understand the CEO of the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board is being offered the post of CEO of Tallaght Hospital. She will not be leaving her current post until later in the year. It is anticipated that the recently initiated review of the National Children’s Hospital project will have been completed before she leaves. Any decision with regard to the future of the Project will be taken based on the outcome of the Review. In all consideration of matters relating to this Project it is my intention to ensure the best possible clinical outcomes for children within the resources available.

Medical Cards 211. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Health and Children if a medical card will be granted in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kilkenny. [11945/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

212. Deputy Patrick O’Donovan asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding an application for a medical card in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. [11950/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): The person concerned was issued with a General Practitioner Visit Card on 11 April 2011.

Health Services 213. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if there is a proposed methadone clinic at Strand House, Phillipsburgh Avenue, Dublin 3, in view of the fact that there is local confusion and misinformation concerning this issue. [11952/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

214. Deputy Ciara Conway asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will consider reorganising current diabetes paediatric services in the Health Service Executive south and south east areas in order that intensive therapies can be accessed locally; if he will appoint additional staff to this service; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11958/11]

805 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

215. Deputy Ciara Conway asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) in County Waterford will be given an appointment to be seen urgently by the orthodontic service in Waterford in view of the fact that this person is waiting more than two and a half years to be seen. [11964/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Medical Cards 216. Deputy Paschal Donohoe asked the Minister for Health and Children his views on the centralisation of medical card waiting lists; the current waiting times for a decision by applicants; the number of persons waiting more than three months, six months and nine months for a decision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11966/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): The Health Service Executive (HSE) is moving ahead with its plans to centralise the processing of all medical cards and GP visit card applications and renewals to its Primary Care Reimburse- ment Service (PCRS) in Dublin. This project is well under way and almost 40% of medical card applications are now processed centrally by the PCRS. Last year a new on-line Medical Card application service was launched (www.medicalcard.ie) which guarantees a 15-day turnaround for complete applications. This new facility was developed to enable people, anywhere in the country, to apply on-line for a medical card, as is the case with many other public services. More than 5,000 on-line applications are being received each month with more than 50% of these made outside of normal office hours. The new on-line medical card application is suitable for people who are likely to quality for a medical card on income grounds. On line assessments are immediate and for applicants who supply all evidence / documentation and are eligible on income grounds, medical card delivery is guaranteed within 15 days of receipt of the completed application pack. Applicants who are over the income limits (i.e. discretionary cases) are informed immediately and may apply to the HSE for assessment in the normal way, if they wish. Any person who has applied through the national office can now view the status of their medical card application or review on-line, using a unique reference number which is provided to each applicant immediately on application receipt. These on-line facilities are under continuous development with additional on- line services to be made available throughout 2011. The information sought by the Deputy is not readily available. However I have asked the HSE to supply this information to me and I will forward it to the Deputy as soon as possible.

217. Deputy Paschal Donohoe asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of medical card owners that will be in the State by the end of 2011; the cost to the Exchequer and the percentage of our population in receipt of these cards and that these figures be supplied for total medical cards and general practitioner only cards. [11967/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): The information sought by the Deputy is not readily available. However, I have asked the Health

806 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Service Executive to supply this information to me and I will forward it to the Deputy as soon as possible.

Preschool Services 218. Deputy Ciara Conway asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will review the application of a person (details supplied) for a second year on the early childhood care and education scheme for them due to the persons special needs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11972/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): The free Preschool Year in Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) programme was introduced in January 2010 as a universal programme to provide children with a free preschool year, normally in the year before they commence primary school. There is no entitlement under the ECCE programme for a second year of free preschool provision. Where a child has special needs, his or her parents can apply to have the preschool year split over two years on a pro-rata basis, for example, availing of the scheme for two days a week in the first year and for three days a week in the second year. However, I understand that the pro-rata option has not been availed of in the case referred to by the Deputy and the child in question will have availed of the full free preschool provision at the end of this academic year. Under the Community Childcare Subvention (CCS) programme which is also implemented by this Department, funding is provided to community-based child-care services to enable them to charge reduced child-care and preschool fees to families on low incomes. Parents and children holding medical or GP visit cards will qualify for a weekly subvention payment of €33 towards the cost of a preschool place, regardless of whether they have already benefited from the ECCE programme. Further information regarding the CCS programme can be obtained from the local City or County Childcare Committee.

Pharmacy Services 219. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding the disposal of medication (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11978/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): There is no national scheme in place currently for people to return out of date or unused medicines for disposal. However, many community pharmacies do accept unused and out of date medication for disposal. The HSE has, from time to time, run campaigns in conjunction with community pharmacies, in some areas of the country, to make provision for the disposal of such medicines. The Regulation of Retail Pharmacy Businesses Regulations 2008 set out the standards applicable to the operation of community pharmacies. Under these Regulations, persons operating registered pharmacies may accept patient-returned medicines for disposal. Pharmacy owners are required to ensure that when disposing of medicines, they must do so in a manner that will not result in a danger to public health or a risk to the environment. In May 2011, the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland issued detailed guidance on the sourcing, storage and disposal of medicines within registered pharmacies. These guidelines set out how patient-returned medicines are to be managed by pharmacies to ensure that returned medicines are never re-used and are disposed of in an appropriate timeframe.

807 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Medical Cards 220. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding an appeal for a full medical card in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11981/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Ambulance Service 221. Deputy Arthur Spring asked the Minister for Health and Children if he intends to continue the policy of centrally locating nationally the control function for ambulances. [11983/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): As Minister for Health and Chil- dren, I am very focused on the increasingly important role of pre-hospital care within the wider health services. A patient’s outcome can depend on the amount of time it takes for an ambulance to respond to an emergency call. The ambulance response time, in addition to the expertise of the paramedics attending the scene, can significantly improve the patient’s prognosis. The Health Service Executive National Ambulance Service (NAS) has embarked on a rationalisation programme of ambulance command and control centres. The rationalisation is in line with a number of health sector reports and international best practice all of which emphasise speed of access to quality emergency services. The reconfiguration of ambulance control centres was first recommended in the Report of the Review Group on the Irish Ambulance Service in 1993. Rationalisation of control centres was further recommended in a Strategic Review of the Ambulance Service in 2001. Since January 2011, the NAS has been working towards achieving improvements in emergency response times against the recently published HIQA Response Times and Quality Stan- dards. Of critical importance to achieving these response times is the need to reconfigure the NAS command and control infrastructure and invest in the latest technology. From the patient’s perspective, the key benefit is that on-line advice and support can be provided and that the nearest resource responds to each emergency situation in the shortest time possible, regardless of location or geographical boundary. It is the NAS’s intention that there will be one system for ambulance control operating in Ireland. The main site will be located on the east coast, with a live stand-by site operating on the west coast in Ballyshannon. All existing ambulance control centre functions will move to these two locations. Existing staff who do not wish to be re-assigned will be redeployed within the wider National Ambulance Service. There will be no compulsory redundancies or job losses. I believe that these developments are in the best interests of patients and that they are a key part of the Government’s work to ensure high quality emergency care.

Medical Cards 222. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding an application for a medical card in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11984/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

808 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Hospital Services 223. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Health and Children when the necessary operational funding for St. Francis Hospice, Blanchardstown, Dublin, will be made available by the Health Service Executive to enable it to begin accepting patients. [12001/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Kathleen Lynch): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive and I will revert to the Deputy with the reply.

Question No. 224 answered with Question No. 200.

Hospital Accommodation 225. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Health and Children if all 100 bed community nursing unit at St. Joseph’s Hospital Raheny, Dublin 5 are opened; if not when will the remaining beds be opened and the average number of beds being used. [12021/11]

Health Services 226. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Health and Children the plans being made to deliver full services locally for the approximately 100 children and adolescents in counties Longford and Westmeath with type 1 diabetes, in view of the fact that many are forced to travel to Dublin to receive intensive treatment and check-ups which are required four or five times a year to limit potential damage in adulthood, as the local paediatric facilities are under resourced; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12034/11]

Medical Cards 227. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding a full medical card in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Longford; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12035/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply to the Deputy.

Question No. 228 answered with Question No. 203.

Child Care Services 229. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will review the case of a person (details supplied). [12089/11]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy James Reilly): The free pre-school year in early childhood care and education programme was introduced in January 2010 as a universal prog-

809 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

[Deputy James Reilly.] ramme to provide children with a free pre-school year, normally in the year before they commence primary school. There is no entitlement under the ECCE programme for a second year of free pre-school provision. Where a child has special needs, his or her parents can apply to have the pre-school year split over two years on a pro-rata basis, for example availing of the scheme for two days a week in the first year and for three days a week in the second year. However, I understand that the pro-rata option has not been availed of in the case referred to by the Deputy and the child in question will have availed of the full free pre-school provision at the end of this academic year. Under the community childcare subvention programme which is also implemented by this Department, funding is provided to community-based childcare services to enable them to charge reduced childcare and pre-school fees to families on low incomes. Parents and children holding medical or GP visit cards will qualify for a weekly subvention payment of €33 towards the cost of a pre-school place, regardless of whether they have already benefited from the ECCE programme. Further information regarding the CCS programme can be obtained from the local city or county child care committee.

Public Transport 230. Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the position regarding the recent monthly ticket price hikes by Dublin Bus; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11990/11]

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar): Any proposal by Dublin Bus to vary passenger fares requires the approval of the National Transport Authority as part of its independent statutory mandate and the exercise of its powers to enter into public service contracts with the company. I have referred the Deputy’s question to the NTA for direct reply. Please advise my private office if there is no reply within ten working days.

Road Network 231. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if projects advertised by the National Roads Authority as Public Procurement Partnerships are always on a 50:50 cost basis; if a cost analysis of the project has to be completed before Exchequer funding is allocated for the commencement of the project; if ministerial permission is necessary prior to any contracts being signed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11898/11]

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar): As Minister for Trans- port, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding in relation to the national roads programme. The planning, design and implementation of individual national roads are matters for the National Roads Authority under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007 in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. Within its capital budget, the assessment and prioritisation of individual projects, including PPP projects, is a matter in the first instance for the NRA in accordance with section 19 of the Roads Act. Noting that, I have referred the Deputy’s question to the NRA for direct reply. Please advise my private office if there is no reply within ten working days. As regards Ministerial approval, the sanction of the Minister for with responsibility for public expenditure and reform is required for PPP contracts.

810 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

232. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport his views regarding a submission (details supplied); if due regard is given to the overall cost of such a project in the present economic circumstances; if he has determined or has information being made available to him regarding the number of outlets within a 20 kilometre radius of the proposal that operate similar such facilities, thus ensuring the safety of drivers and if due consideration has been given to the loss of employment factor in relation to such facilities if the proposal is agreed to; if the viability of such projects on other motorways has been determined; if the cost through the involvement of the National Roads Authority to the Exchequer of the proposal has been determined; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11949/11]

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar): As Minister for Trans- port, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding in relation to the national roads programme. The construction, improvement and maintenance of individual national roads, including the provision of servic areas, is a matter for the National Roads Authority under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2007. Within its capital budget, it is a matter for the NRA to assess and prioritise individual projects. As regards service areas, I am aware that the NRA has recently sought expressions of interest from interested parties in relation to the provision, on a commercial basis, of service areas at two locations, including Kilcullen. Noting the Deputy’s interest in the matter I have referred his question to the NRA for direct reply. Please advise my private office if there is no reply within ten working days.

Port Development 233. Deputy Paschal Donohoe asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the future for Dundalk Port Authority; and the future use of the port itself. [11968/11]

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar): The current recession has inevitably had a negative impact on the finances of all the State port companies. Dundalk Port Company, being one of the smallest ports, has been badly hit. From a high of 221 ships in 2006, only 64 ships entered the port in 2010, and the figures for 2011 show no signs of improvement. Earlier this year, an independent business review of the company was carried out. The review examined all the possible options for dealing with the current situation, including the prospects for recovery and the possibility of amalgamating the company with another State body. I am currently considering this report and I will make a decision regarding the future of the company shortly. A public consultation on future ports policy took place last year and the intention is to publish a revised policy document by year end. A key policy issue raised in the consultation is the current structure of the sector, whereby the State owns ten separate port companies of very varied size. The recent McCarthy group report recommended that the number of port companies be reduced through amalgamations. These wider policy issues will be addressed in the revised policy document.

Rail Network 234. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will engage with Iarnród Éireann and Fingal County Council to service the immediate opening of the new Hansfield train station in west Dublin, which has been lying idle for a year despite a major demand for public transport in the area. [12014/11]

811 Questions— 18 May 2011. Written Answers

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar): As Minister for Trans- port, Tourism and Sport I have responsibility for policy and overall funding in relation to public transport. Following the establishment of the National Transport Authority on December 2009, the implementation and development of infrastructure projects in the Greater Dublin Area, such as Hansfield train station, comes under the remit of the NTA. The legislative basis for this is section 11(1)(e) of the DTA Act 2008: “Principal Functions of Authority — The principal functions of the Authority are to secure the provision of public transport infrastructure”. Noting this I have referred the Deputy’s question to the NTA for direct reply. Please advise my private office if there is no reply within ten working days. Notwithstanding the above, I have engaged with the relevant parties -Irish Rail, Fingal County Council and the NTA. Funding is available in the NTA budget to provide a carpark for the station once an access road has been built. Fingal County Council appears willing to amend the SDZ planning scheme for the area to facilitate progress on this, though this has not happened to date. A major stumbling block is the ownership of the land and the loans associated with it, as the Deputy will be aware. The developers of the land around the station have not complied with their obligations to provide the access road. I continue to work on this matter and will see it through.

Taxi Hardship Panel 235. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport further to parliamentary Question No. 251 of 29 March 2011, when Pobal will respond; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12032/11]

Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Alan Kelly): The Deputy’s original question did not issue to the agency due to revised procedures in my office, and I apologise for that. My Department contacted Pobal in this regard last week and I understand that the response will issue to the Deputy this week.

Ministerial Meetings 236. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will meet with a person (details supplied). [12090/11]

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar): I have not received any request to meet the individual or organisation referred to by the Deputy. The Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ring, who has responsibility for sport, and my officials are of course available to meet this organisation should it seek such a meeting.

812