Dáil Éireann

1. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Mr. Denis Hastert; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9572/99]

2. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his visit to Belfast on 29 and 30 March 1999; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9573/99]

[805]

3. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions in Belfast on 29 and 30 March 1999 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9574/99]

4. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent telephone conversation with the President of the United States of America, Mr. Bill Clinton; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9575/99]

5. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his visit to London on 15 April 1999; the official engagements he undertook; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9577/99]

6. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the issues he discussed, other than Northern Ireland, when he recently met the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9582/99]

7. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meetings with the Northern parties and Mr. Tony Blair during Easter Week. [9870/99]

8. Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the considerations, if any, he has given to the option of using preferenda in dislodging impasses, such as decommissioning, which occur where several options exist in a problem solving situation. [9919/99]

9. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the current position with regard to the establishment of the Northern Ireland Executive. [10080/99]

10. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent visit to Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10081/99]

11. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting in Germany with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10082/99]

12. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meetings with the leaders of Northern Ireland's political parties; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10090/99]

13. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the discussions with political parties in Northern Ireland leading to the declaration made at Hillsborough on 1 April 1999. [10091/99]

14. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the contacts or discussions he has had with the British Prime Minister and the political parties in Northern Ireland since the Hillsborough Declaration on 1 April 1999. [10092/99]

[806]

15. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the discussions he has had with Sinn Féin regarding the proposal in the Hillsborough Declaration to have some arms put beyond use on a voluntary basis; his assessment of the IRA acting on this proposal in view of his discussions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10093/99]

16. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the proposals for the collective act of reconciliation provided for in the Hillsborough Declaration; if there will be an event or events in this jurisdiction to mark the day; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10094/99]

17. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the progress made to date in implementing the sections of the Good Friday Agreement for which the Government has responsibility; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10095/99]

18. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself that the 12 month deadline will be met under which the Government may make a declaration that amendments should be made to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution in view of his discussions with the political parties in Northern Ireland and the Hillsborough Declaration; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10097/99]

19. Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions at the European Heads of State meeting in Brussels last week with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair. [10106/99]

20. Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions in Brussels on 14 April 1999 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10215/99]

21. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the official engagements he undertook on his recent visit to London; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10218/99]

22. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting on 14 April 1999 with Prime Minister Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10275/99]

23. Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions in London last week with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair; if he discussed the alleged NATO bombing of a civilian convoy in Kosovo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10312/99]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 23, inclusive, together.

I had a series of meetings during Holy Week, most of them jointly with the British Prime Minister, with the Ulster Unionist Party, the SDLP, Sinn Féin, the Women's Coalition, the Alliance Party, the PUP and the UDP. These meetings culminated with the working proposal for a declar[807] ation which the Prime Minister and I published at Hillsborough on 1 April. During and following the discussions, I had telephone conversations with President Clinton, as did others, in which the President sought to assist in overcoming the last obstacles to full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement.

The Prime Minister and I had hoped the working draft would provide a basis for agreement on the difficult issues which had been the subject of the discussions. On my return to Dublin I reviewed these discussions and the draft declaration with Speaker Hastert and the delegation from the US Congress that he led on a visit to Ireland as part of his first visit abroad as Speaker.

The talks adjourned until Tuesday, 12 April, and from the discussions in the resumed talks it became clear that the draft declaration, in the form put forward at Hillsborough. would not serve as a basis for resolving the impasse. The working draft was an attempt to bridge the gap between the parties and to find a way forward to the formation of the institutions within a short time. It sought to address the concerns of the parties involved and to approach the issues in a fresh way, while fully consistent with the Good Friday Agreement. We were fully aware the approach suggested in the working draft would depend for its success on the full and active co-operation of all those concerned.

Given the absence of consensus and the rejection of, or reservations expressed about, aspects of the draft declaration by some parties, the Prime Minister and I, after our meetings on 14 and 15 April where Northern Ireland was the only item on the agenda, decided to jointly enter into a series of meetings with the Ulster Unionist Party, the SDLP and Sinn Féin. These meetings took place in London on Monday and were followed by conference calls with other parties in Belfast. The discussions which were intensive and valuable reviewed all the relevant elements.

It was clear the parties remain anxious to see early implementation of the Good Friday Agreement and remain committed to the Agreement which is also the bedrock for the two Governments. The difficulties remain to be overcome and further work must be done by all involved, including further discussions to take place next week. The two Governments will continue to shoulder their responsibility to lead the process and we will not flag in our efforts, but it also remains essential that all the parties involved take their responsibilities and work constructively to overcome the difficulties. Any follow-up in regard to the proposed day of reconciliation would be contingent on further developments and consensus around an agreed approach.

The question of the Government making a declaration that will trigger the amendments to Articles 2 and 3 would arise in the context of the entry into force of the British-Irish Agreement and would depend on the success of the continuing discussions. Any necessary actions arising [808] from the discussions, whether it is the making of the declaration or, if the situation arises, the introduction of legislation to extend the deadline, will be taken.

After my meeting with the Prime Minister on 15 April, I visited the Irish Studies Centre of the University of North London where I contributed to its public lecture series. The title of my address, a copy of which has been placed in the Dáil Library was “ Ireland and Britain: A New Relationship For A New Millennium”.

The question of using preferenda to resolve the current impasse has not been considered. However, if Deputy Sargent has any specific suggestion to make as to how the issues we currently face could be resolved in this way, I would be happy to have it considered.

An interdepartmental steering group, chaired by the Department of Foreign Affairs and including representatives of my Department, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Attorney General's office, is responsible for the co-ordination of the implementation of the relevant aspects of the Good Friday Agreement for which the Government has responsibility. Deputies will be aware of the considerable progress made to date – for example, the enactment of the legislation to amend the Constitution and its subsequent overwhelming endorsement by the people, the negotiation of the North-South elements of the Agreement and subsequent enactment of the British-Irish Agreement Act and the enactment of the legislation dealing with the release of prisoners and the progress made in that area.

The Bill to establish a human rights commission in this jurisdiction is being drafted on a priority basis, based on proposals approved by the Government, and will take account of the views of the Joint All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution and the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality and Women's Rights. The Bill which will in some respects go further than the provisions of the British Northern Ireland Act, 1998, establishing the Northern Ireland Commission, is expected to be published and taken in this session.

As regards equality legislation, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has set September next as the target date for the implementation of the Employment Equality Act, 1998. The Act prohibits discrimination in relation to employment on nine distinct grounds – gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religious belief, age, disability, race and membership of the travelling community.

On 8 March the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform announced arrangements for the equality infrastructure which is being put in place to underpin employment equality and equal status legislation. The equality infrastructure which he announced and which was established under the provisions of the Employment Equality Act, 1998, consists of two new bodies – the Equality Authority which will replace the existing [809] Employment Equality Agency and the Office of the Director of Equality Investigations to provide a forum of first redress.

The Equality Authority was appointed by the Minister on a designated basis on 8 March. After enactment of the equal status legislation, the remit of these two bodies will be broadened beyond the employment equality area to cover matters under the Equal Status Bill. The Equal Status Bill was published yesterday and is a comprehensive measure to tackle discrimination in our society in the non-employment sphere.

In the Good Friday Agreement the Government agreed, taking account of the work of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution and the report of the Constitution Review Group, to bring forward measures to strengthen and underpin the constitutional protection of human rights. These proposals will draw on the European Convention on Human Rights and other international legal instruments in the field of human rights. The question of incorporation of the ECHR will be further examined in this context. I have written to the chair of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution requesting that the committee examine the issue with a view to bringing forward recommendations to the Government. The matter is also being examined interdepartmentally.

On 16 February the Government approved proposals for the ratification of the Council of Europe Framework Convention on National Minorities. Formal ratification is expected to take place in May of this year to coincide with ceremonies relating to the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Council of Europe.

Regarding measures to demonstrate respect for the different traditions on the island of Ireland, it is expected the Department of Foreign Affairs will soon be in a position to bring forward proposals relating to the Battle of the Boyne site. This is in addition to the Government's contribution to the cost of the memorial at Messines, the participation of the President at the opening of the Peace Park there and a new construction, landscaping, maintenance and guide services project under the Wider Horizons Programme of the International Fund for Ireland. I also expect to be able to announce further funding for relevant projects under the Irish Sailors and Soldiers Land Trust Act, 1988.

Mr. J. Bruton: Is the Taoiseach in favour of an international inquiry into the death of Rosemary Nelson as recommended by the US House of Representatives?

The Taoiseach: From the first time I heard Rosemary Nelson had been murdered I raised the matter with the British Government and have had numerous discussions with that Government and with the Prime Minister in particular. What I have consistently pressed the British Government for is an investigation with the maximum independence and international involvement. I have [810] had discussions with Paul Nelson and with the international groups on human rights and the groups here dealing with the human rights case. In those discussions there have been a number of developments in relation to the conduct of the investigation into Mrs. Nelson's murder, including the appointment of two senior British police officers, David Phillips and Colin Port, to take charge of the investigations and the involvement of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation. These developments are welcome as far as they go. We have continued at political and senior official level to press the British Government to do more.

There are two aspects in all of this. The investigations have to take place first. In reply to Deputy Bruton I said there had to be outside police forces involved. At first one police force was involved but there were difficulties because the individual saw his role, not as a direct hands-on role, but as an overseeing role. We pressed hard for hands-on involvement and co-operation and the second officer was appointed. A substantial number of people from outside Northern Ireland are involved as well as the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation.

What we have continued to press for, on which there are discussions today at senior level in Belfast, is information on how an investigation or an inquiry happens. We have continued to stress there will have to be a thorough, impartial and independent investigation and that whatever investigation takes place will be the essential starting point for any future inquiry. There are two aspects in all of this: the investigation and the inquiry.

I have discussed this matter with a number of Nationalist organisations and human rights organisations. The difficulty is that most Nationalists will not co-operate or give evidence to RUC officers in this case. They have refused to do so. That has been articulated to me by everybody, including Rosemary's husband, Paul. They have stated that the structure for the many Nationalists who want to give evidence to an outside police force must be absolutely clear. We support that. There has to be an outside police force.

There could be an argument about international involvement. I have taken the view that if the British Government can give us the assurances that this investigation is impartial and independent, that the police officers are not the RUC and that it is structured in such a way as to satisfy the groups involved – and with the American involvement – that could be satisfactory. If it moves on to an inquiry, which is almost inevitable, an independent inquiry such as the Saville Inquiry would lend support. These matters are ongoing. I have had both private and public conversations with the British Government. Discussions continue today in Belfast and will continue at political level later in the week.

[811]Mr. J. Bruton: Will the Taoiseach explain the thinking of the British Prime Minister and himself in publishing the Hillsborough Declaration, given that that declaration contains a number of novel ideas for overcoming the decommissioning impasse – and there are not many novel ideas around for this – at a time when the talks were adjourning? Would it not have been better to have retained it as a working document, without publication, to ensure people did not find themselves in the position of having to reject it because it was published? Why was it decided to publish it in the way it was done?

The Taoiseach: That is a valid question. We had been in discussion for close on two months with some of the parties on this matter. The Irish Government which was the initiator of the idea had explored the matter in considerable detail. We also discussed it with the NIO and the British Government at various meetings and with the political parties. It became clear in Hillsborough that we were discussing it. In the tight confines of Hillsborough all the parties were picking up aspects of what we were discussing. We had not been involved with the broader groups of parties on this issue but mainly with the UUP, PUP and Sinn Féin. By the time we came to the last morning in Hillsborough everybody had a fair idea of the proposal. All the other parties requested that we address the issue with them and we had discussions with them. Following those discussions it was considered that this was a novel idea. The approach suggested in the declaration was an honest, fair and well-intentioned attempt to find a way through the difficulties. While we tend to have more discussions with the three parties that will, I hope, form the Executive the other parties are equally important. The only fair way of dealing with it was to publish the proposals.

In respect of the Hillsborough Declaration not all of the contents were published. The bones of the idea were put out but not all the details.

Mr. Quinn: I return to the first question put to the Taoiseach by Deputy Bruton. While I listened to the long answer he gave I am not sure whether he said “yes” or “no”. Does he regard the current arrangements which he described in some detail as tantamount to and equivalent to an international inquiry?

The Taoiseach: I have accepted, and said in the House previously, that the RUC has to be involved in the investigation. I was not satisfied when only one police officer was involved. The Irish Government pressed hard, as did others, for more involvement and I was happy with that. I was certainly happy with the involvement of the FBI. However there are still difficulties. A matter I am still trying to have resolved to my satisfaction with the British Government and its officials is the need to ensure in the investigation with the British Government that there is absolute certainty for Nationalists, which there is not [812] at present, that they can deal with the investigators and give a frank and total report of what they know in a way that will not land them in difficulty with the RUC. I do not wish to make too much of it until we conclude the negotiations. We have spoken with most of these groups. I am conscious that discussions are ongoing in Belfast. I am not satisfied that that matter has been fully dealt with but I believe it can be. We have put forward certain proposals. If they are accepted I am satisfied we will be able to carry out the investigation.

Mr. Quinn: Will that be sufficient to meet the demands for international objectivity?

The Taoiseach: Yes. If that part is dealt with satisfactorily, it would be unreasonable of me to put further pressure on Prime Minister Blair to do any more at this stage. We must wait and see how it works out. In security terms there is a distinction between an investigation and an inquiry. As I said, everybody believes that the investigation must take place before an inquiry. The form of the inquiry will be extremely important and I have given my views on what I consider would be a workable solution in that regard.

Mr. Quinn: Will the Taoiseach indicate why the Government is so implacably opposed to incorporating in domestic law the European Convention on Human Rights?

The Taoiseach: I and the Government are not implacably opposed to it. The issue is to find the basis on which it can be done. Long before the Good Friday Agreement, the constitutional review group came out against incorporating the convention if it meant replacing the constitutional provisions relating to fundamental human rights with those of the convention. Given the commitment in the Good Friday Agreement, as I said yesterday, the matter is being further examined by a small interdepartmental group comprising officials from the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Foreign Affairs, my office and the Office of the Attorney General. Its work is almost finalised. As soon as it is completed, it will examined by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

I have seen the preliminary report. Yesterday I was not sure whether it was the preliminary or final report, which was why I did not wish to comment on it. However, it is not the final report and the work will be finalised. While it was stated that the weight of legal opinion is against incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights in the Constitution, the relevant arguments do not apply to incorporating the provisions by means of legislation. This happened in Britain.

Mr. Quinn: And in every other country.

The Taoiseach: It also happened in other countries which are members of the Council of Europe. If that is the case, once the interdepart[813] mental group's work is concluded, I will agree to such a move. However, I want the work to be completed before a decision is made. If that is the case in other countries, legislative provisions could be made. The Deputy is incorrect that the Government is against incorporating the convention. It is a matter of ensuring the work is finished first.

Mr. Quinn: My party published a Bill around Christmas, proposing the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights in domestic law and not an amendment to the Constitution. When proposals emerged from the Government following due consideration, that provision was eliminated. The Taoiseach has restated the current position, which is that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, that bastion of liberty and reform, is against the incorporation into domestic law of the European Convention on Human Rights. The issue of incorporating the convention in the Constitution has never arisen as far as my party is concerned. What is the Government's position on incorporating the convention in domestic law?

The Taoiseach: It may not have arisen with regard to the Deputy's party but it arose at the constitutional review group two years ago. At that stage, the group viewed it as a negative step and it recommended a series of amendments to Articles in the Constitution to bring them into line with modern international human rights norms. That is not the Deputy's point, but in view of commitments I gave and when the work of the interdepartmental group, which includes officials from my office, is finished, it should be incorporated in legislation if that is possible. The Deputy will appreciate that the group should be allowed to finish its work before a final decision is made.

Deputies J. Bruton, Sargent, Higgins (Dublin West) and Quinn rose.

Mr. Quinn: May I make a final point?

An Ceann Comhairle: The time for questions to the Taoiseach is limited and other Deputies tabled questions.

Mr. Quinn: The Cabinet cleared a set of proposals for the establishment of the Irish Commission on Human Rights which explicitly excluded the incorporation of the convention into domestic law.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is making a statement.

Mr. Quinn: Why did the Government make that decision? The reason is not clear from the Taoiseach's comments. Why it is so opposed to the incorporation of the convention?

Deputy J. Bruton rose.[814]

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Joe Higgins. I will return to Deputy Bruton.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): In relation to Question No. 7—

Mr. J. Bruton: I tabled ten questions and I represent considerably more people than the Deputy.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): The Deputy had a good say already.

Mr. J. Bruton: I asked two short questions.

An Ceann Comhairle: I ask the Deputy to proceed with his supplementary question. He should not be interrupted.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): Nobody could think that Deputy Bruton does not get his fair say.

Mr. J. Bruton: Nobody could say that about the Deputy.

Mr. Browne: (Carlow-Kilkenny): When the Deputy is leading 54 Members, he will get the same say.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): Given the ways things are going in this country, that might happen sooner than the Deputy thinks.

Mr. Browne: (Carlow-Kilkenny): The summer.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): Did the Taoiseach specifically discuss the tragedy of Mrs. Rosemary Nelson's death with the British Prime Minister? Does he agree that many people, including civil rights lawyers, would not regard an investigation under the auspices of the British Government and in which the British police would play a significant role as a truly independent investigation or inquiry? When alleged threats were made against Mrs. Nelson, the RUC was also acting under the auspices of the British Government. In cases of miscarriages of justice relating to race and nationality, the British police has a record which leaves much to be desired.

Given these aspects and the full page advertisement in today's newspapers by a campaign seeking the full truth surrounding the tragic murder of Mrs. Rosemary Nelson, will the Taoiseach agree to call for an independent, international judicial inquiry and investigation into her murder?

The Taoiseach: I will call for what I hope the campaign is also trying to achieve, which is a thorough, impartial and independent inquiry into all aspects of the case. This perhaps is more important than the name that is placed on it. Senior officers from two different police forces outside Northern Ireland, a large number of other officers and representatives of the FBI are [815] involved. However, if we can get satisfactory answers to the concerns expressed about the ability of the RUC to conduct the investigation in an impartial and thorough manner, that part of the investigation will proceed. If we cannot get satisfactory answers, we will re-examine the position.

We must also consider the inquiry aspect which will follow this investigation. I am more interested in getting to the bottom of the case and ensuring that it is done correctly. I am not sure who placed the advertisement in the newspapers and whether it was one of the groups who put its case to me. However, we have taken on board the views of all the groups who put their cases to me. I have put forward the points of view of all the human rights groups, including those which met in the United States and Ireland, and I will continue to do so.

Mr. Sargent: In relation to the murder of Mrs. Rosemary Nelson, does the Taoiseach agree that the yardstick of the independence and effectiveness of the investigation is if he is satisfied that collusion, if it existed, could be uncovered under the structures now in place for the investigation? Is he satisfied, if collusion existed, that such a revelation could be made under that structure? If not, what precise recommendations will he make to the British Government to ensure the independence of the inquiry?

In relation to Question No. 8, I appreciate that the preferendum option is not appropriate in all conflict resolution circumstances. However, as Deputy Bruton said, there is a lack of novel ideas to get us beyond the impasse. The de Borda Institute, which has done considerable investigation on conflict resolution from Bosnia to Indonesia and East Timor, should be kept in mind and consulted when there is a lack of novel suggestions as to how we might move forward. East Timor now faces a civil war—

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is making a statement. He should confine himself to a brief supplementary.

Mr. Sargent: I ask that the de Borda Institute, which has carried out much research on conflict resolution, be consulted.

The Taoiseach: That is not under consideration but I do not rule it out if there is a valid way to look at it.

Some people argue that the RUC should not be involved in the investigation into the murder of Rosemary Nelson. It is not much use sending Australians or Americans to look for the Garvaghy Road to find out how it was involved in this. I do not understand that argument. The RUC is the body which has considerable knowledge about these matters and people and must be involved in it.

[816] There is an important issue. Against a background of serious allegations of threats and intimidation directed towards Rosemary Nelson by RUC officers, which stand up to scrutiny, concerns have been raised by everyone to whom I have spoken about the ability of the RUC to conduct the investigation on its own in an impartial and thorough manner. That is why the FBI and two other police forces are involved. Paul Nelson and many others emphasised that there are many potential witnesses who possess relevant information who are reluctant to come forward because of the involvement of the RUC in the investigation.

We must negotiate and finalise this issue with the British Government so we may be satisfied – and I am not yet satisfied – that the key operational concern is to ensure the investigation is structured and operated in such a way that all potential witnesses or those with relevant information can come forward with confidence. If we can achieve that I will be happy. If we cannot we must look further.

Mr. J. Bruton: The Taoiseach said that he has heard credible allegations that RUC officers threatened Rosemary Nelson. Will he outline the allegations he believes are true?

Has the Taoiseach received any explanation from Sinn Féin of why it believes decommissioning is not an obligation under the Good Friday Agreement in light of the fact that Sinn Féin, in agreeing the Mitchell Principles, accepted that it had an absolute commitment to the total disarmament of paramilitary organisations? That element of the Mitchell Principles was included in the Good Friday Agreement which was voted on by the people. Has Sinn Féin explained how that does not constitute an obligation?

The Taoiseach: Rosemary Nelson gave detailed accounts to the congressional hearings. She prepared a detailed report for the upcoming hearings containing chapter and verse on this: dates, times, locations and names of clients who were intimidated. It makes for a conclusive story. When I attended the congressional hearing which looked at this at a very full meeting of the Congress, it stated that it believes that these allegations have substance. I would be wrong if I did not say that they stand up. As I have said before, I am sure the vast majority of officers go about their business in an upstanding way, but there seem to be some in this case who do not.

It must also be borne in mind what Rosemary Nelson was doing mainly at these times. She was not just representing the residents of the Garvaghy Road. Her more detailed role was the work she was doing on the Pat Finucane case; the congressional hearing related to that case. The groups I met think her death was as much to do with that as anything else.

It is the view of Sinn Féin that its position was to use its best endeavours to convince those with whom it would be associated to involve them[817] selves in the decommissioning of arms and explosives. It considers that to be something it will do over the course of the Agreement. It does not agree with my view of the indispensable role of the decommissioning process as part of the entire Agreement. It is no secret that we see things differently. We must construct a way to take on the different understandings to find a resolution. We are quite some distance apart at this stage although we are trying to move closer. The contents of the Hillsborough Declaration demonstrate that we are trying to use our imagination to give everyone a soft landing on this issue. I am being honest in saying that the hostility with which what I thought was a very soft landing was greeted, leaves me unsure about how the process can be moved forward but I am honour bound to try to find a resolution and will continue to do so.

Mr. J. Bruton: The Hillsborough Declaration was a genuine and imaginative effort to overcome the difficulties for everybody. My only regret is that it was rejected so readily by people for whom it was designed to be of assistance. I am worried that might not have happened if we had not published it.

Has the Taoiseach considered the possibility of assembling a book of evidence on the murder of Rosemary Nelson of the kind I initiated concerning Bloody Sunday which led to a new enquiry into the matter because the Government had done a great deal of the homework on the subject? The Taoiseach has said that there are allegations which he believes. Would it not be useful to present them in a comprehensive report which would have standing and objectivity and would be of assistance?

The Taoiseach: That might be necessary in time but the Deputy will appreciate that the book of evidence on Bloody Sunday was prepared 20 years after the event. I said before that that work was extremely helpful in achieving the Saville inquiry; it would not have been achieved without it. It is too early in this case. I hope the British Government, taking into account the Pat Finucane case, which is related to this, will make the necessary changes in structure to make sure that witnesses will participate.

If that is not possible the issue of further international elements or a book of evidence, with the international way being looked at first, will have to be examined. We must ensure that those who believe they have a contribution to make feel able to be adequately involved in the case.

Mr. Currie: Did the Taoiseach raise the demand of the IRA for legislation concerning the return of the bodies of the disappeared in his conversations with the British Prime Minister? If so, what conclusions did they reach? Does the Taoiseach agree that, after a quarter of a century, the relatives who received good news now have to wait for the legislation to go through? Why is there such a delay in this House? Is the Taoiseach [818] aware of the confident expectation among Nationalists in the North, as exemplified in today's Irish News, that this legislation would be put through the House this week and through the Seanad next week as a matter of urgency? What is causing the delay? Is the Taoiseach aware that in his absence last week, the Tánaiste gave me an assurance on the Order of Business that there would not be any delay? She said it ought to be quite easy because the new legislation would be based on the legislation on decommissioning. What is the reason for this further delay after a quarter of a century?

The Taoiseach: First, there are many reasons, one of which is that we have to agree an understanding with the British Government on the type of legislation. That has not yet happened but perhaps I should not go into that because it might raise more questions that it would answer. That issue remains to be resolved. Second, the Minister has been involved in other obvious matters which has delayed some of the progress, but work is ongoing on it. The Deputy will know that I discussed these matters with the British Government. I hope we are not being blamed for the delay in the return of the bodies of the disappeared, for which I have argued for a long time. Under the legislation forensic or ballistic studies cannot be carried out which would be used for future prosecutions. It will give immunity in that regard. The bodies could be returned but those who were involved are seeking protection and a concession on that basis which, in these circumstances and from a humanitarian aspect in terms of the relatives, we are prepared to do. We will not delay unduly.

Mr. Currie: The Taoiseach knows I do not ask questions which might create difficulties because of my sensitivity to these matters; he described me on one occasion as the most helpful Member of the House in relation to Northern Ireland. Does he understand my perplexity in relation to this matter? We were told that after 25 years this matter would be addressed with the maximum urgency, that it was a simple matter based on legislation similar to that on decommissioning. Does the Taoiseach understand that the relatives, some of whom were a little sceptical of the IRA statement, are now totally perplexed as to the reason we are not proceeding with the legislation in this House? I agree with their puzzlement in this regard.

The Taoiseach: The answer is as soon as possible, but it is not entirely a matter for this House. We have to have agreement in terms of the basis on which this legislation will pass through these Houses and Westminster.

Mr. Currie: Perhaps the Taoiseach will talk to me about it.

[819]Mr. Quinn: Arising from the Taoiseach's comprehensive reply on the impasse in the Northern talks and the danger that that impasse constitutes for the Good Friday Agreement, and bearing in mind that this House gave enactment to the legislation that provided for the referendum in the first instance, what concrete steps does he believe this House can take – the Agreement belongs to all of the citizens of this country – to maintain the momentum that will lead to a resolution of the outstanding issues so as to ensure that all the components of the Agreement, not just the question of decommissioning, can be brought into effect as is the wish of the overwhelming majority in this Republic and on this island who voted for it?

The Taoiseach: We discussed this matter the other day. Many aspects of the Agreement will give people confidence that it will be implemented – including the equality and human rights agendas, the legislative measures, the status of the Irish language, etc. There are other more minor issues which are important to loyalists, Unionists and republicans. I stressed the other day that these issues are important. I have gone through the Agreement and any small decision will help in that regard, otherwise people see these issues as a difficulty.

There are other areas which are difficult. The position changed dramatically following the murder of Rosemary Nelson. I am dealing on a daily basis with the various groups and bodies but I believe our society does not totally understand the enormous effect Rosemary Nelson's death had in Northern Ireland. The people here see this as more of the same but it has been said to me that if pipe bombs exploded here most nights over a number of weeks, this House would be debating it, or if the families of republicans and Nationalists had been threatened, there would be more said about it.

Mr. Quinn: Not so.

The Taoiseach: That is an issue they continually raise. From a constructive point of view, any movement we can make on legislation or on any elements of the North-South bodies should be made. I believe we are doing that.

Mr. Quinn: I do not wish to be destructive but bearing in mind the Taoiseach's three previous sentences, will he not concede that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is hopelessly overloaded with work? He is required to introduce 30 Bills. In retrospect, the decision to merge the Department of Equality and Law Reform with the Department of Justice was a disaster.

Mr. J. Bruton: Perhaps he does not have the horsepower.

Mr. Quinn: The Bill on the human rights commission is stalled; it will be discussed tomorrow [820] for the first time. We will not see the Bill in relation to Irish citizenship until September. Will the Taoiseach agree that on the small measures which the Taoiseach has outlined, and with which this House wants to help, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is overwhelmed and cannot cope? Some emergency steps have to be taken to provide additional forces, either civil servants or legislators, to deal with the small blocks that together could construct a wall of confidence between ourselves and those who do not want to see the Agreement put in place.

The Taoiseach: There are issues outstanding but an enormous amount of work has been done. Before Easter this House passed all the institutional arrangements. The Human Rights Bill is before the committees.

Mr. Quinn: It is not. That is a misrepresentation.

Mr. J. Bruton: It is an inaccuracy.

The Taoiseach: We will shortly see the Bill Deputy Currie was talking about.

Mr. Quinn: We will not.

The Taoiseach: As soon as possible after agreement is reached. These issues have to be dealt with. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is responsible for approximately 34 Bills, most of which are on the Justice side. The Deputy knows the number of Bills that were passed by the Department of Equality and Law Reform during its entire period.

Mr. Quinn: I do. A substantial number.

The Taoiseach: It was substantial legislation but not in a numerical sense. There are many non-legislative issues that can be dealt with and it is important that is done. Some of those are here and some are with the Secretary of State.

An Ceann Comhairle: We must conclude questions to the Taoiseach.

36. Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will introduce a millennium bonus payment for social welfare recipients for Christmas 1999. [10429/99]

37. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the cost of providing a once-off double payment to all social welfare recipients; the plans, if any, he has to make such a payment for the last week of 1999 to mark the millennium; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10560/99]

[821]Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 36 and 37 together.

An amount of £42 million is provided in my Department's 1999 Estimates to provide for payment of a Christmas bonus for approximately 715,000 recipients of long-term social welfare payments.

This estimate is based on the payment of a bonus in 1999 similar to the bonus paid in 1998 and earlier years, i.e., 70 per cent of the person's normal weekly payment subject to a minimum payment of £20.

The bonus is paid to recipients of disablement pension; death benefit by way of pension; old age contributory and non-contributory pension; retirement pension; invalidity pension; widow's and widower's non-contributory pension; orphan's contributory and non-contributory pension; pre-retirement allowance; blind pension; carer's allowance; one parent family payment; unemployment assistance at the long-term rate; disability allowance; payments to people formerly in receipt of deserted wife's benefit and allowance and prisoner's wife's allowance.

The bonus is normally paid in the second week of December. The cost of increasing the bonus payment to 100 per cent based on 1999 payment rates would be in the region of £18 million. A once-off double payment to all recipients of weekly social welfare payments would cost an additional £75 million.

As the Deputies know I have already provided for substantial increases in the weekly rates of social welfare payments and family income supplement payable from the first week in June next at a full year cost of £206 million. These included a £6 increase in payments to pensioners and a £3 increase in the personal rates of other social welfare payments. This means that the contributory old age pension will now amount to £89 per week, an increase of £11, or 14 per cent, on the rate when this Government took office and one-third more than the Rainbow Coalition provided in three budgets.

Any change in the Christmas bonus or the provision of a special double payment to mark the millennium would have substantial cost implications and would have to be considered in the context of other priorities and commitments.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: Would the Minister accept that the cost of the 1999 Christmas bonus proposal is £42 million and that doubling payment would cost an additional £42 million? Does he accept that there will be an Exchequer surplus of £1 billion by the end of this year? To mark the millennium, will he not agree that it would be fair to the 700,000 people who rely on the bonus to celebrate Christmas, to make a once-off payment from that enormous surplus?

Mr. D. Ahern: The Government is conscious of the significance of the millennium. To mark 1999 as the year of the elderly, the Government [822] repeated a measure introduced in its first budget and awarded an increase of £6 to old age pensioners on the maximum rate – an increase of almost four times the rate of inflation.

The Minister for Finance took 15,000 old age pensioners out of the tax net in the budget – the highest number of pensioners ever taken out of the tax system. The Minister for Health and Children brought forward proposals for a programme over three budgets to bring more people over the age of 70 into the medical card system. These measures were introduced to commemorate 1999 as the year of the elderly.

The Government has been developing plans for the millennium. The Minister of State, Deputy Séamus Brennan, is the chair of the Millennium Committee which has £30 million of public funds and additional private sector funds to commemorate the millennium. All Departments are conscious of the fact that we should commemorate the millennium.

Mr. Broughan: We have had growth rates of 10 per cent this year and last year and huge growth is projected up to 2010. Many sections have done very well, including semi-State employees such as those in Telecom Éireann. Surely this gives the Minister an opportunity to put something into the pockets of the poorest one third of society.

The Minister disputed some of the points in the ESRI report published before Christmas but he cannot contest that we are spending a declining percentage of GDP on social welfare – the figure is now under 10 per cent. This is an important year and some groups are hyping up the millennium and looking for additional moneys. However, there will be a lengthy holiday period which will create financial difficulties for people such as senior citizens, those on invalidity and disability benefits and carers. Surely this is an ideal opportunity for the Minister to ask the Minister for Finance to provide additional funds to give an extra bonus payment.

We discussed increases announced in the budget which are introduced months later. Many of my constituents commented unfavourably on this issue. This is an ideal opportunity for the Minister to give a little to the poorest section of society. I do not suggest that we should not deal with long-term issues regarding child benefit and pensions and I commend the Minister on the progress he has made in that regard. However, this is an opportunity to create a more inclusive society and to make a significant gesture towards the poorest one third of society.

Mr. D. Ahern: Since taking office the Government has shown that it is conscious of the need to help the less well-off. In two budgets we have increased old age pensions by a sum equal to the increases in the three years of the previous Government.

Mr. McGrath: That has nothing to do with the question.

[823]Mr. D. Ahern: The social welfare package announced in the last two budgets has increased by 49 per cent over the figure during the previous two years under the rainbow coalition Government. The Government's record on looking after the less well-off as well as possible is recognised.

To give a double Christmas bonus would cost an extra £42 million. Deputies will appreciate that this is a significant amount and well over the amount available to the Millennium Committee which has £30 million. If that money was available we would have to consider whether it would be better spent on carers or those with a disability. I am not saying it is available but the decision would have to be made in the context of the preparation of the Estimates and the budget.

Mr. Broughan: The Minister might do it.

Mr. D. Ahern: I will not repeat what was done by Governments of which Deputies on that other side of the House were involved. The only two cuts which ever took place in the Christmas bonus occurred under Labour Party and Fine Gael Governments.

Mr. McGrath: The Minister did not change it.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: The Minister should get off his political bandwagon and try to get to the bones of this question. Does he not accept that we are dealing with the “have-nots“? We are talking about pensioners, the disabled, widows and the long-term unemployed – about 700,000 people. Does he not accept that they are as entitled to mark the millennium as the “haves“? Does he not accept that, without assistance along the lines proposed, they will not be in a position to do so?

Does the Minister not agree that we are talking about a once-off payment which would account for only 4 per cent of the expected Exchequer surplus at the end of the year? While I appreciate the Minister does not have funds available at the moment, would he not consider joining with the Opposition parties to send a message to the Minister for Finance that this is an issue about which all parties are making a common case? Would he not feel his hand would be considerably reinforced as a result? I urge the Minister to join our campaign and do something decent rather than leaving the ‘have nots' on their own when it comes to marking the millennium on 1 January next.

Mr. Broughan: Like Deputy O'Keeffe and I, the Minister attended the CORI conference some weeks ago at which Fr. Healy and Sr. Reynolds spoke. One of the points which stuck in my mind was that Ireland currently spends less on social welfare provision or basic income than any other EU country, with the exception of Portugal which some consider to have fundamental infrastructural problems. The Minister seems to be wavering on this matter. Perhaps he feels an urge to align [824] himself with the Opposition spokespersons and ask the Minister for Finance for additional funding. I realise that the provision of such funding will not make a fundamental long-term difference – we have yet to act on child care, carers, senior citizens, pension provisions and so on.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is making a statement; he should put a question to the Minister.

Mr. Broughan: I floated this idea some weeks ago in response to comments made in the media in regard to spongers. Will the Minister associate himself with me in decrying comments made by a columnist in the Daily Star newspaper which constituted a totally unwarranted attack on senior citizens, widows and the long-term unemployed? I call on the journalist to recall her attack on people who are dependent on State welfare, through no fault of their own.

Mr. D. Ahern: Spending on social welfare currently exceeds £5.1 billion which is approximately 25 per cent of all Government spending. To say we are not spending much Exchequer funding on social welfare is incorrect.

Mr. Broughan: It is under 10 per cent of GDP.

Mr. D. Ahern: One can consider social welfare spending as a proportion of GNP and compare it with spending in other countries. For example, if one looks at a graph of the amount spent in each EU country on old age pensioners, one will see that Ireland spends the least and Italy spends the most. That is not because we are paying individual old age pensioners less than they are paid in Italy or elsewhere. We have a relatively young population; other countries such as Italy, England and Germany are obliged to spend more on the global figure because they have far more old age pensioners as a proportion of those working than we have. As we have a relatively young population, we spend less on social welfare than other European countries. Since this Government came into office, 55,000 people have left the dole queues and taken up employment and, consequently, social welfare spending has reduced. That is to be lauded. There is nothing better than providing people at the lower end of the scale with jobs and this Government has been extremely successful in doing that. In the past year alone, 95,000 jobs were created.

I read the newspaper article to which the Deputy referred. Not everyone would be in agreement with the proposal which has been made; it is obvious the author of the article does not agree with it. I am not trying to defend the author but she makes the point that while she has no problem paying for old age pensioners, she has a problem with paying money for people who are claiming the dole and working at the same time. I do not believe anyone in this House would disagree with her on that.

[825]Mr. J. O'Keeffe: We will keep up the pressure on the Minister.

Mr. D. Ahern: Deputy O'Keeffe does not have a monopoly on ideas.

38. Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the arrangements, if any, in place to provide for consultation and communication with and between his Department and regional health boards; if he has satisfied himself with these arrangements; and the proposals, if any, he has for improvements in this regard. [10430/99]

Mr. D. Ahern: My Department has overall responsibility for the supplementary welfare allowance – SWA – scheme which is administered as part of the community welfare service by the health boards.

There are extensive communication and consultation arrangements between my Department and the health boards on all aspects of the SWA scheme. These range over a broad spectrum of meetings, seminars, presentations, working manuals, circulars, letters and communication by e-mail.

These communication arrangements are for the purpose of providing guidance and advice on the interpretation of legislation, on procedural issues involved in the implementation of new schemes and on matters relating to the administration of existing schemes. My officials met with health board officials on 70 occasions in 1998.

My Department has a duty of care to the users of its services to ensure they are treated in a fair and equal manner, consistent with the relevant legislation, regardless of which office or official is dealing with their case. Communication plays a crucial role in achieving this.

There are large numbers of scheduled and once-off meetings held between my Department and senior health board officials on a wide variety of issues. These can range from daily operational matters concerning the computerisation of the SWA scheme to presentations and seminars to health boards on specific issues relating to policy, control and appeals procedures.

A variety of joint committees were established with the health boards in recent years to facilitate consultations on SWA related matters. A number of working groups meet regularly on specific issues to ensure that there is an appropriate degree of liaison between health boards and the Department in relation to the administration of the SWA scheme. The purpose of these groups is to discuss policy, technical, legislative and procedural issues, and to iron out difficulties that can arise. One such group was involved in drafting and issuing the first comprehensive SWA procedures manual to health boards in 1998.

I intend to rationalise some of the existing groups and committees in the near future when [826] the computerisation of the Eastern Health Board is completed to ensure that SWA issues can continue to be identified and addressed in full co-operation with the health boards.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: I understand that an advisory committee dealing with matters of policy and administration and comprising a representative of each of the regional health boards and departmental officials has not met since the Minister took office. Why is that?

Mr. D. Ahern: Perhaps the Deputy could give me some more detail about the committee.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: The committee comprised a member of each of the regional health boards and departmental officials and dealt with policy matters such as SWA. I understand it has not met since the Minister took office.

Mr. D. Ahern: Many of these groups are, to a certain extent, no longer necessary because of the ongoing computerisation – known as ISTS – of the health boards. Most of the health boards are operating on this system and only the Eastern Health Board remains to be computerised. We need to rationalise many of these advisory groups because a great deal of business is now carried out on the computerised programme.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: Does the Minister accept that while e-mail and technology have a role to play, they cannot replace the human interchange of ideas? Does the Minister accept that the advisory committees which existed up to the time he came into office performed a very useful function in terms of discussions between the representatives of the health boards and his Department? Does he further agree that the debacle in his Department last Christmas over the infamous circular would not have taken place if the advisory committee had been sitting and if the issues arising in the circular has been discussed by it?

Mr. D. Ahern: I do not agree at all. We have discussed this. The fact that the Deputy is raising this issue in April shows the paucity of things he has to give out about. For example, I note there are no questions this month about issues concerning farming.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: We will be back.

Mr. D. Ahern: This is probably because, as Tom Parlon validly acknowledged, the main demands of the 40,000 farmers who paraded in Dublin have been met with the implementation of farm assist.

Mr. McGrath: The Minister is filibustering.

Mr. D. Ahern: The Deputy must have difficulty concocting some of the stories. I could read out a long list of advisory and liaison groups which have met on an ongoing basis. There are nine [827] groups concerned with connections between the CWOs in relation to the SWA system and my Department. Because of ongoing computerisation, I do not think there is much need for many of these groups. As I said in my reply, there will be a rationalisation of these groups. Regarding the Christmas bonus, an effort was being made to bring uniformity to the system in relation to the delivery of the Christmas bonus. The circular issued because two of the major health boards were out of step with the others. The objective of both circulars was to bring some uniformity and fairness to the system.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: Does the Minister accept that efforts to bring about uniformity by diktat is the wrong approach? Does he further accept that the advisory committee to which I referred performed a very useful role in terms of consultation? Does he agree that it was very unwise to essentially make that committee defunct? Does he accept that it would be useful to revive the committee so that the type of consultation which took place between the Department and the health boards can again take place in order to avoid a debacle similar to that which occurred last December?

Mr. D. Ahern: I do not accept that at all. I took no action to ensure any advisory or consultative group did not meet in my Department. I could read out a long list of groups which exist and which meet on a regular basis.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: Does the Minister know what is happening in his Department?

Mr. D. Ahern: The advisory group is no longer necessary because all the issues it dealt with are now dealt with by the ISTS programme project managers as a result of the system being – thankfully – computerised, except in the case of the Eastern Health Board. As I have already said, my desire is to ensure the Eastern Health Board is computerised through the CWO system so that the uniformity which exists in all other health boards can also be present there.

39. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will make a statement on the report, "The Disincentive Effects of Secondary Benefits", prepared by Goodbody Economic Consultants; the discussions, if any, he has had with the social partners regarding the report; when these will be concluded; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10561/99]

Mr. D. Ahern: The report prepared by the consultants, which I published recently, sets out to [828] examine the range of issues associated with the interaction of secondary benefits and the incentive to take up employment and training opportunities. The report sets out the background to the evolution of arrangements for the retention of secondary benefits by long-term unemployed people who take up work or engage in certain labour market programmes. It makes a number of recommendations on how these arrangements might be refined in order to deal with inconsistencies and anomalies which have arisen. These recommendations cover a number of issues, including for instance the medical card and the local authority differential rent scheme which are outside the remit of my Department and which are being pursued by the Departments concerned.

Other wider issues, such as those relating to information provision, will be the subject of further consideration by the interdepartmental steering group established to oversee the study undertaken by the consultants.

In so far as my Department is directly concerned, the key issue relates to the rent and mortgage interest supplements paid under the supplementary welfare allowance – SWA – scheme. As the Deputy will be aware, Partnership 2000 contains a commitment to consider ways of dealing with the employment trap arising from the withdrawal of these allowances once a person takes up full-time work of 30 hours or more per week.

Following publication of the report, my Department immediately initiated discussions with the social partners on this issue. The first consultative meeting with the social partners was held on Friday last and a further meeting has been scheduled for next month. The purpose of these discussions is to seek to devise cost effective solutions to the employment trap identified in Partnership 2000. It is an extremely complex issue and all parties to the discussions are conscious of the need to take full account of such issues as equity within the SWA scheme. Equally, they are conscious of the need to ensure that any proposals emerging from the discussions do not give rise to employment or poverty traps elsewhere within the system.

I am confident that the discussions with the social partners will be fruitful and that they will facilitate the development of proposals which can be considered in the context of the next budget.

Mr. Broughan: Like most Deputies, I found the report prepared by Goodbody Economic Consultants to be particularly thought provoking. Was the Minister surprised to find that only 2 per cent of respondents in the survey highlighted the loss of benefits as the major deterrent to taking up employment? Was he surprised that approximately one-third of respondents specifically highlighted the effect of low wages? Would he consider that the recently renewed determination to ensure the minimum wage is introduced by this [829] time next year is critical in terms of the elimination of poverty?

In the recommendations the back to work scheme receives great commendation in terms of retention of benefits, as does the job assist scheme. Are there any ways in which the attractiveness of the back to work scheme could be further increased in order to entice more people back to the workforce?

Can the Minister do anything about FÁS trainees and their lack of entitlement to rent supplement in many if not most areas? Deputy Wall has tabled a question in this regard.

Mr. D. Ahern: I am conscious of the question tabled by Deputy Wall. It is one of the issues which prompted the examination of this matter. There is no doubt that the job assist scheme and particularly the back to work allowance are extremely useful. No matter where I go people come to me and compliment the Department on the back to work allowance as it allows people re-enter the workforce while retaining benefits.

It is an extremely difficult issue as movement in one direction tends to create anomalies. I agree with the Deputy and this is one of the reasons the Government in its programme committed itself to bringing forward a minimum wage and why the Tánaiste, who has responsibility in this area, is very keenly aware of the need to bring this forward as quickly as possible.

I acknowledge the points made by the Deputy in his earlier question relating to the respondents' replies and which. to a certain extent, might surprise people. However, people are beginning to understand that there are schemes operated by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs and other Departments under which they can retain secondary benefits. Efforts have been made over the years by previous Governments to ensure secondary benefits are not lost as it has always been acknowledged that, at least according to anecdotal evidence, the perception of losing them prevented people from taking up employment. There is still some work to be done and that is why we have already set up discussions in this regard with the social partners. I would like to think proposals would come forward from these discussions sooner rather than later.

Mr. Broughan: One of the chief themes of the report is the information deficit. Many citizens are not aware of the schemes administered by the Department, such as job assist and the back-to-work allowance, to encourage social welfare recipients to join or return to the workforce. Has the Minister given consideration to launching a major campaign in this regard? On medical cards and rent supplement, there is an uneven pitch. Less than one third have a medical card in the Eastern Health Board area. In parts of the west the figure is 50 per cent.

Mr. D. Ahern: When the disincentive effect of the differential rent system was raised previously [830] I expressed my desire to ensure uniformity across local authorities. There has been contact with the Department of the Environment and Local Government in that respect. My Department is probably one of the better Departments when it comes to the provision of information. I fully accept, however, that some are reluctant to approach a Government Department for information. That is the reason I provided substantial extra resources in the last two years to the independent National Social Service Board which operates a network of 80 plus citizen information centres throughout the country which are to be upgraded and computerised. I intend to invest further in the service to alleviate some of the difficulties highlighted in the report.

Mr. McGrath: On rent allowance, a young girl, a single parent, came to see me recently. She had taken up work in a local hotel and was earning approximately £80 a week. She discovered that this would affect her rent allowance. She decided as a result to give up work. Will the Minister consider this anomaly? If one is working, it improves one's outlook on life.

Mr. D. Ahern: I am conscious of this anomaly, which is the subject of the one of the main recommendations in the Goodbody report. The Government gave a commitment in Partnership 2000 to consider ways of addressing it. As changes could have significant drawbacks elsewhere in the system, the matter is being discussed with the social partners which met last Friday and which have agreed to meet again next month.

40. Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will increase the disregarded income threshold for eligibility for non-cash benefits applicable to public service pensioners who paid the modified PRSI rate from contributory pension plus £30 to contributory pension plus £100; and if all pensioners over 75 will be eligible for these benefits. [8028/99]

Mr. D. Ahern: The free travel scheme is available to everyone resident in the State aged 66 and over regardless of income. The other free schemes such as free electricity allowance, free telephone rental allowance and free television licence are available to those, usually aged 66 and over, who are in receipt of a social welfare type payment and who are either living alone or who otherwise satisfy this condition. Widows and widowers between the ages of 60 and 65 whose late spouses had been in receipt of the free scheme benefits retain that entitlement.

Since July 1996 the free schemes are also available to low-income pensioners who are not in receipt of a social welfare type pension and who satisfy a means test. The weekly means income limit fixed for this purpose is the maximum per[831] sonal rate of old age contributory pension, which from June will be £89 for a recipient aged 66 to 70 years and £94 for a recipient aged 80 and over, plus £30 and any increases for a qualified adult, dependent children, living alone, as appropriate. The make-up of this income limit means that it will increase automatically each year on foot of budget increases in pension rates. Major increases were granted in the last two years. This means that a single pensioner living alone can have an equivalent weekly income of £125 and qualify for the free schemes. A pensioner living with a qualified adult can have an equivalent weekly income of £174.50 and qualify for the free schemes. These exemption limits are reasonable. The schemes were further extended in June 1997 to allow those aged 75 and over who are in receipt of a qualifying payment or who satisfy the means test to qualify without reference to the composition of their household.

The following table shows the estimated number aged 75 and over who are not in receipt of the free scheme benefits. They include those living in a household that already receives the free scheme benefits – the allowances are per household, not per person; and those not in receipt of a qualifying payment or above the means threshold. There is also the issue of take-up.

Table

Free electricity/gas allowance and free television licence	71,200
Free telephone rental allowance	83,000

The free schemes were originally designed to benefit mainly older people in receipt of a social welfare type payment who were living alone and required additional assistance. During the years they have been developed and extended on an ad hoc basis which has led to increasing pressure for further extensions.

A major review of the schemes has recently commenced to assess whether their objectives are being achieved in the most effective and efficient manner. A fundamental issue is the underlying rationale for these types of schemes and their effectiveness in overcoming poverty and social exclusion. The review is being undertaken by the Policy Institute, TCD in association with the Department. It is expected that it will be completed and published by the Policy Institute this year. The conclusions will be considered in a budgetary context, as appropriate.

Ms O. Mitchell: I am aware that improvements have been made during the years to extend the schemes or non-cash benefits as they are called to various groups. There is, however, a small and diminishing group of public service pensioners who because they paid modified PRSI are probably the only group who do not qualify. Those on considerably higher incomes, such as those in receipt of occupational and social welfare pen[832] sions, qualify for payments. The Minister mentioned that the income threshold was raised in 1997 to the maximum personal rate of old age contributory pension plus £30. Would he consider increasing that by £100 to include older people over 80 years of age whose health is diminishing and who are distressed by the prospect of not being able to meet bills they have paid all their lives?

I am sure the Minister agrees there is something inherently wrong when people who gave their lives to the public service, who still pay tax and PRSI, including training, employment and health levies until recently, cannot benefit from that from which the rest of the population of a similar age benefits. They are a small and diminishing group. Perhaps the Minister would examine the matter because I know it causes great hardship for public service pensioners, and it is only public service pensioners—

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy should ask a question. I am concerned about how few questions are dealt with during Question Time. Members should ask brief and specific questions because the purpose of Question Time is to elicit information from the Minister.

Mr. Broughan: The Minister gives long replies.

Ms O. Mitchell: I seldom have the opportunity to contribute so I try to make the best of every question.

Mr. D. Ahern: I thank the Deputy for her remarks. I accept that changes made over the years have created pressure and I acknowledged that in my reply. It is one of the reasons we have initiated this review of free schemes. There will always be pressure to widen such schemes. One of the reasons the Minister for Finance made dramatic changes in the tax treatment of old age pensioners was to care for those not in receipt of social welfare payments. This relates to the issue of the treatment of old age pensioners. The additional benefit to them of the free schemes, on top of the £89 they will receive from June, is about £11 on average, so it is substantial.

We have dramatically increased the old age pension in the past two years which has increased the threshold below which people will benefit from the free schemes if they are eligible for them. A single person living alone with the equivalent weekly income of £125 will qualify, as will a couple or a pensioner living with a qualified adult with an equivalent weekly income of £174.50.

Ms O. Mitchell: I accept that, but does the Minister agree that an income of £125 for an 80 year old with no medical card is small and that these small aids by way of fuel allowances and telephone rental allowance can make a significant difference to their quality of life and peace of mind?

[833]Mr. D. Ahern: Since I was elected to the House, I have been a firm believer in assisting people in their latter years. I will bear in mind the issue the Deputy raised when we examine the matter.

41. Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will report on the poverty proofing of Government decisions; if the one year pilot programme across Government is proceeding successfully; and if this programme will be a permanent feature of Government decision making. [10355/99]

Mr. D. Ahern: Following a Government decision in July last year, a system of poverty proofing in the case of significant policy proposals has been introduced on a one year pilot basis across Departments. This system seeks to ensure the needs of the poor and socially excluded are considered as policy is designed. The revised Cabinet handbook issued in October 1998 states that memoranda for Government should indicate the impact of the proposal for persons in or at risk of falling into poverty in the case of significant policy proposals. In consultation with the social partners, a framework on poverty proofing was prepared setting out the process to be followed. This framework was circulated to all Departments in September 1998.

In response to a request from my Department, information was recently provided by Departments on their experience of poverty proofing to date. A summary note on the issue was circulated at the Partnership 2000 secretariat meeting on 23 March last incorporating details of the poverty proofing exercise conducted by the Department of Finance and my Department on the 1999 budget. In general, feedback from Departments indicates that the poverty proofing arrangements are becoming more embedded. Departments are taking steps to raise the profile of the poverty proofing process internally by such means as office communications and the inclusion of the issue at management level fora. Departments have been applying the process to memoranda for Government and my Department has been monitoring memoranda submitted to it to ensure the appropriate reference is included.

Given that this complex process has only been in operation for some months, it is inevitable that it will take time for the process to be implemented fully. In a further effort to assist Departments to implement the process, my Department has now finalised additional guidance notes, incorporating some worked examples of the process in action, which are now being issued to all Departments. My Department will also pursue possibilities for incorporating appropriate training modules into general service training courses. It is important to bear in mind that the process is only half way through its pilot phase of one year. The review of the pilot process [834] is due to be conducted around September this year and any ongoing difficulties in implementation will be identified and addressed at that stage.

Poverty proofing plays a vital role in bringing the needs of the disadvantaged to the forefront of the policy agenda and demonstrates the Government's commitment to the cause of social inclusion.

Mr. Broughan: I thank the Minister and his staff for a recent briefing which brought this valuable initiative to my attention. Does he believe that, given the role poverty proofing is playing, it should cease to be a pilot programme and should become embedded forever in the system? What special role, if any, does the Minister have at Cabinet on this matter? Would it be necessary for him to adopt the role of ultimate poverty proofer for any programme? With regard to the Combat Poverty Agency's recent report, a copy of which I have not yet received—

Mr. D. Ahern: It was only issued two days ago.

Mr. Broughan: I saw the publication but do not remember receiving a copy. What role will the agency play in this system?

On the issue of schemes in general – the capital grants for sports bodies, which often go to deprived areas, and the Minister's grants for voluntary bodies being two specific examples – the key problem with them is that, despite the best efforts of Ministers and their predecessors, the schemes receive about 10 to 20 per cent of the funding they need. Affirmative action is needed in this area.

Mr. D. Ahern: I thank the Deputy for his remarks about my staff and their briefing. I would like to see the system of poverty proofing continue because, having been at Cabinet at a time when there was no reference to poverty proofing, it is safe to say that almost all memoranda which come to Cabinet not only have a section on implications for gender but also on implications for poverty. Departments are now acutely aware of this matter. It is not just a case of my monitoring the arrangements at Cabinet. It is becoming ingrained in the system and that takes time. In everything Departments do they must be conscious of the need for poverty proofing and, in that regard, it is slowly but surely coming to fruition.

The Deputy referred to my overall responsibility for the social inclusion strategy, the National Anti-Poverty Strategy. One of the key issues is the implementation of the strategy throughout Departments and part of that process is poverty proofing. Departments acknowledge that whatever they do must be examined in the context of the implications for the less well off in society.

[835]Mr. J. O'Keeffe: Does the Minister believe there is a recognition on the part of officialdom that there is a substantial amount of poverty in society? Does he accept that much more is needed than a formal poverty proofing procedure to tackle the roots of that poverty? What plans, if any, does the Minister have to tackle the root causes of poverty in society? Does he believe the poverty proofing approach he has outlined is the main plank of his anti-poverty platform?

Mr. D. Ahern: No. I am currently bringing forward the first annual report on the NAPS. Some of the targets set when that plan was put in place a number of years ago have been effectively met. When it was compiled it was hoped unemployment would be down to a rate of 6 per cent by 2007. The current rate is 6.7 per cent. Therefore, a 6 per cent rate will be reached well in advance of the target date set in the plan.

Given the work we have done on the unemployment rate in the past couple of months, we anticipate it will be down to 5 per cent, which is even lower than the rate we anticipated under the employment action plan, which commenced in September 1998. At that time we expressed the view that the rate would fall to 7 per cent over the period of the plan, a target that has already been exceeded. At the time the Tánaiste and Minster for Enterprise, Trade and Employment expressed the hope that the rate would be reduced to 5 per cent.

I am currently considering re-energising the targets with a view to creating even more ambitious ones. I plan to shortly introduce new targets on what we should do to address indicators on the level of poverty. Ultimately, the route out of poverty is by providing people with the opportunity to find jobs.

I am not making a political point when I say there has been a sea change in the last number of years. Many of the figures often quoted inside and outside the House are old. For example, an ESRI report on child poverty indicated that 28 per cent of children are living in a state of poverty or in a level of relative poverty. That was a 1994 figure and it is already acknowledged the level of consistent poverty has fallen. We still have a job to do and there are difficulties, but we are moving to create a better and more inclusive society.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: When will the Minister have a new NAPS plan?

Mr. D. Ahern: I hope very shortly. I am considering publishing the first annual report on the NAPS and introducing new targets in the near future.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe: Will it be weeks or months?

Mr. D. Ahern: It is being examined by the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Social Inclusion and Drugs, which meets regularly. It is meeting tomorrow to consider this matter.

[836]Mr. Broughan: A difficulty with the National Anti-Poverty Strategy is that its targets are based on the 1994 era. The world has changed dramatically since then. Poverty is relative. For example, the choices available to the better off 20 per cent of society are much wider. Those in the bottom 30 per cent have a far more restricted lifestyle. Does the Minister agree he should address this area also?

Mr. D. Ahern: I acknowledge that. Political practitioners in the House sometimes wonder about this aspect. Many of the indicators on poverty refer to levels of relative poverty and people's expectations. While this does not distort figures or perceptions, we must accept there is relative and consistent poverty. Our research indicates that consistent poverty has been reduced. The issue of relative poverty depends on how well others are doing in society and on expectations. In view of this we are conscious of the need to re-examine the targets.

The unemployment targets have been met long before dates outlined in the plan. Similar targets have been met on issues such as income adequacy and the achievement of the CSW rates. These were already achieved in the budget.

We have not been as successful in a number of other areas and we are examining these and new areas. The Combat Poverty Agency has indicated that in preparing the last NAPS plan, with which I was not involved, we did not push hard enough for the issue of child poverty to be included on its agenda. I have taken on board what it said in that regard and we will consider this issue in the context of new targets we hope to set and to bring forward in the near future.

Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.

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 Kenny – the termination of funding on the Corrib system development plan and the economic loss to the entire region as a consequence; (2) Deputy Timmins – the receipt and accommodation of the Kosovo refugees; (3) Deputy Coveney – the provision of funding to ensure the Irish Marine Emergency Service at Crosshaven can purchase an inshore rescue boat for the Cork harbour area; (4) Deputy Rabbitte – the need to find a solution to the industrial dispute involving scaffolders which is now causing serious disruption to the construction industry; (5) Deputy Allen – the appointment of a fourth judge to the Central Criminal Court to relieve the serious congestion and delays and particularly in the case of a murder trial (details supplied); (6) Deputy Broughan – the urgent need to provide extra teaching staff at St. Malachy's boys national [837] school and St. Monica's national school, Edenmore, Raheny, Dublin 5.

The matters raised by Deputies Kenny, Timmins, Allen and Broughan have been selected for discussion.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 6:

–(Deputy Higgins, Mayo)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Deputy Roche was in possession. However, as he has concluded his contribution I call the Minister.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): I listened carefully to what the Opposition spokespersons and Deputy Joe Higgins had to say. Deputy Joe Higgins appears to be under the impression that, if the penalty stays the same, the Bill sends out a message to anyone trafficking in drugs with a substantial value, irrespective of their type, that we are equating soft drugs with hard drugs. That is an extraordinary conclusion to reach and is one I do not accept.

The message the Bill sends out is not that one should take soft as opposed to hard drugs, but that one should not take drugs or become involved in the sale, supply or trafficking of them. If one does, and the drugs are worth £10,000 or more, one will receive a mandatory sentence of ten years imprisonment. The Bill is clear on this and, therefore, people will not be able to say they did not know the law in this area.

I cannot accept the amendments tabled by the main spokespersons for the Opposition. I make a similar point regarding them as I made on amendments Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7. The intention in specifying the ten years minimum penalty is to make it crystal clear that the offence is one of such gravity that the imposition of an exemplary penalty is justified.

Section 5 provides that a person convicted of the new offence will incur a penalty commensurate with the gravity of that crime. In view of the unique nature of the trade in illegal drugs and the great misery inflicted on so many people by those who deal in that deadly trade, we, as legislators, must do all we can to rid ourselves of this scourge.

I accept that a minimum sentence of ten years is undoubtedly a harsh punishment but I am satisfied that it is warranted and proportional. It should send an unequivocal message to those engaged in the illegal drugs trade and to those [838] who might be tempted to engage in it, that we are serious about doing all we can to eradicate this blight.

The effect of Deputy Higgins's amendment would be to delete the “ten year minimum sentence”. In other words, the appropriate penalty to be imposed in a particular case would be left entirely at the discretion of the courts. That is the current position under the Misuse of Drugs Acts and the courts are empowered to impose a sentence of anything up to life imprisonment. Deputy Higgins is effectively saying that we should maintain the status quo and not change the law on penalties. I feel sure Deputy Higgins knows by now, since this legislation has had a tortuous journey through the Oireachtas to say the least, that it would defeat the purpose of the section. One should not lose sight of the fact that the Bill allows the courts to depart from the requirement to impose the minimum period in exceptional and specific cases where it would otherwise be unjust in all the circumstances to impose the minimum ten year sentence.

This brings me to the point made by Deputy Howlin, who felt that some cases would be too harshly treated unless there was at least some kind of an escape clause. I have inserted into the legislation at this stage an escape clause if there are exceptional and specific cases where it would otherwise be unjust in all of the circumstances to impose the minimum ten year sentence. Relevant factors which the court may consider include: whether the person pleaded guilty, taking account of the stage at which such an intention was indicated and the circumstances surrounding the indication, and whether the person materially assisted the investigation of the offence.

In this context, the Bill attempts to make a distinction between those who are cynically involved in the drugs trade for profit and those who, because of a problem with addiction, have become caught up in it. While I emphasis that feeding a habit is no excuse for engaging in this trade, it would be futile not to recognise the part which addiction can play. Therefore, the Bill gives a court the power when imposing sentence on a person convicted of the new drug related offence to inquire whether the person was addicted to drugs at the time of the offence and, if satisfied that he or she was so addicted and that this factor was a substantial fact leading to the commission of the offence, to list the sentence for review after half of the mandatory period specified by it has expired. When the review takes place the court may, having regard to any matters it considers appropriate, suspend the remainder of the sentence on any conditions it considers fit. This provision is appropriate and just but I should make it clear that even where these mitigating circumstances arise the persons involved will still face a long period of imprisonment.

With regard to Deputy Howlin's amendment, which seeks to delete the provision that the ten year minimum sentence may only be departed from in exceptional circumstances, I believe the [839] approach in the Bill is a better one. I acknowledge the philosophy underlying Deputy Howlin's amendment and feel he may accept that we are almost of one mind on it. The Bill allows the court to have regard to what are referred to as “exceptional and specific circumstances relating to the offence, or the person convicted of the offence,” which would make a sentence of 10 years imprisonment unjust in all the circumstances. It seems that where it is intended that a minimum sentence must be imposed by the court where the person is guilty of possession of drugs with a value of £10,000 or more, then in departing from that the court must be satisfied that there are exceptional circumstances which warrant that. Factors such as duress or mental capacity might be relevant to this and may be taken into account by the courts. This part of the Bill strikes the right balance and in the circumstances I cannot accept the amendments.

With regard to the other arguments which were presented, for the most part I had heard them before at different stages and my position remains as it was.

Mr. Howlin: I am obviously concerned that after a long period to reflect, the Minister has not been impressed even by the minimalist position much less the larger position put forward by Deputy Higgins and me. Anything which tramples on the discretion of a judge to rule exclusively on the facts and circumstances of the case in front of him or her should be avoided.

I know the Minister is determined to send a clear signal about drug trafficking. By and large, he would have no opposition in this House to sending a clear message, but to treat all in a blanket way with a mandatory regime is bad law. I will not convince the Minister on that but I had hoped there would be some chink in the Minister's position on allowing some degree of discretion to the judge by removing the words “exceptional and” so that all circumstances could be taken into account by the judge in determining the final sentence. If the words “exceptional and” were removed, “specific circumstances relating to the offence, or the person” which would cause ten years' imprisonment to be unjust would remain. We should strive, particularly with the backdrop of recent business, to always ensure that all sentences are at least just. It disappoints me greatly that that minimalist change cannot be accepted by the Minister.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): It is regrettable that the Minister did not deal with any of the arguments even though he stated that he dealt with them before. I put some specific arguments but he merely keeps repeating one old mantra. From the experience of his party in 1994, the Minister should know that an exhortation to a prominent member of the party to keep repeating what he said before if he was pushed, did not serve them well at that time. I hoped the Minister [840] would have learned from that. He should deal with each argument separately and try to defeat them by referring to specifics and examples rather than repeating himself. My main argument is that this legislation sends a message that soft drugs can be confused with extremely more damaging and dangerous drugs such as heroin.

What is the Minister saying to the victims of other desperate crimes? Rape is a heinous crime. Will the Minister follow his logic by proposing a mandatory ten year sentence for rape? If not, why not? What about other despicable crimes against the person? The pushers and barons will load the drugs on to couriers, disparagingly referred to as “mules”, who will take the rap. This will result in more drug addicts – the “mules” are drug addicts in many cases – desperate to feed their habit. It will increase the population of heroin addicts in prisons. Will the Minister make commensurate resources available for treatment and rehabilitation for those in prison?

I am in favour of placing the heaviest burdens on peddlers of heroin, the most destructive of drugs, which has destroyed certain working class communities. Unless resources are invested to overcome deprivation, unemployment and poverty, unfortunately, some young people will always be vulnerable to the gangsters who peddle heroin in their midst. Overcoming those problems is the only answer to overcoming the devastation of heroin.

Mr. Gregory: I agree with most of what the Minister said, except in one important respect. The Minister proposed this measure when he was in Opposition and I voted against it on Committee Stage because he did not focus on the drug which has caused most devastation in this country – heroin. The Minister has an opportunity to send a message to those who are destroying families, young people and communities that he will deal with them in the harshest possible manner by introducing mandatory minimum ten year sentences for offences relating to hard drugs, particularly heroin.

This is nothing new. Across Europe major distinctions are made between heroin and other drugs. The idea of mandatory sentencing is difficult. However, it has been made necessary by the actions of the courts. I remember when the Minister first put forward this proposal the average sentence being given out by the courts for drug dealing was around three years, at a time when the Oireachtas had long since provided for life sentences for drug dealing. Since then not one major, minor or other drug dealer has been given a life sentence.

Only a few weeks ago, people who brought in over £10 million worth of heroin to Dublin received a six year sentence. Some members of the Judiciary who are totally out of touch with the destruction which heroin has caused are failing to act decisively and are thus contributing to the problem. Unfortunately, although I think the [841] Minister's proposal is well intentioned, he will also contribute to the problem because in this legislation he is failing to focus attention on the drug which is destroying lives and communities. This legislation was an opportunity to do that, which would have been worthwhile.

I only have two minutes to speak—

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: As this is Deputy Gregory's first contribution on this amendment he is not constrained by the two minute rule.

Mr. Gregory: How long do I have?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: As long as the Deputy refers to the issue in the amendment—

Mr. O'Donoghue: Until seven o'clock.

Mr. Gregory: I assure the Minister I will not take that long. I have spoken on this issue before as it has arisen so often. The escape clauses are adequate and I would not expand them further than the Minister has done, otherwise one would defeat the purpose of introducing a mandatory minimum sentence. I have examined this over the period of time it has been before us. It defeats its own purpose by not focusing on the drug which motivates us. Of the special or new legislation which has been introduced with regard to drug dealing has been in response to the appalling blight and plague of heroin, particularly in Dublin. It follows that when particularly harsh legislation is introduced it should relate specifically to that. If it does not it sends out a confused message which will not be accepted by young people because they know there are differences between these drugs.

The Minister said he will not change his mind. I have asked him to act on this before, as have Deputy Joe Higgins and others today.

Mr. Higgins: (Dublin West): He should listen.

Mr. Gregory: I appeal to him again. This is a great opportunity to make a real contribution to the fight against heroin in Dublin. This would be of enormous benefit to Irish society, not just to inner city communities and the suburbs where heroin has caused devastation. It would be a brilliant sign that the Government is taking action against those who are causing this terrible plague. I cannot make the case any more strongly. I do not appreciate why the Minister cannot do this. He has not explained why it cannot be done, as it is done elsewhere.

As we are dealing with severe legislation against drug traffickers I wanted to take this opportunity to speak to the Minister about something I have raised with him on previous occasions and only a few months ago in the House. Several of the major drug traffickers who were living in Dublin and were at the root of much of the destruction of communities are now living in Amsterdam. The Minister will remember being at the committee meeting at which I named [842] two of those three people. George Mitchell, known as “the Penguin” and Derek Dunne, known as the “the Footballer” are now in Amsterdam; George Mitchell is in jail for a short period. They are still orchestrating the supply of heroin into Dublin. One of them was named only last week in a court in Britain—

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy is wandering away from the subject matter of the amendment.

Mr. Gregory: —as being responsible for heroin supply into Dublin. I ask the Minister and his Department to look at ways, whether through the conspiracy laws or otherwise, to extradite those people and deal with them because, if we do not get the top traffickers, much of our efforts will be wasted.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Deputy Jim Higgins has two remaining opportunities to speak. He can speak for two minutes now, if he wishes, before the Minister speaks. He will then have an opportunity, as the proposer of amendment No. 6, to speak a second time.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): I would like to hear the Minister's response to the substantial arguments made by Deputy Gregory in particular.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I will then call Deputy Higgins to wind up the amendment. However, he can also have two minutes now if he wishes.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): The Minister put it very well when he said that powers exist under the Misuse of Drugs Act to impose life sentences. If the powers exist, why are they not being availed of? I take the point made by Deputy Gregory that sentencing is often not as tough as it should be. I am all in favour of sending out the toughest possible message. However, uniformity and non-statutory guidelines are needed. I gave the example of a case where a court decided to impose a life sentence because of the misuse of drugs. In effect, the court was using the drugs offence to deal with an associated offence the person involved had committed but on which the court was unable to achieve a conviction.

The Minister said the amendment I am proposing, in effect, asks to leave things alone. That is precisely what I am saying. I am saying that if there is an option under the existing legislation to impose a life sentence, that should be done if it is justified. A sentence of ten years should be imposed if that is justified and a sentence of five years should be imposed if there are mitigating circumstances.

The Minister wrote to me on 28 September in answer to a query I made about a case where I felt the sentence imposed on someone who raped a young girl at knife point was inadequate. The Minister spelled out to me the various studies being carried out in respect of sentencing and [843] sentencing policy. He said the Judicial Studies Institute had already held a conference for judges of the Supreme and High Courts and that one of the topics for the conference was sentencing; a second conference was held at the end of April, entitled “Drugs: The Judicial Response”, which members of all four levels of the Judiciary attended; and a further conference for judges of the Circuit Courts is scheduled for the end of this month.

He said that the complex question of sentencing policy was addressed at length by the Law Reform Commission, both in a consultation paper and its report on the matter and that action had already been taken on a number of the recommendations contained in the report. He gave the example of the Criminal Law Act, 1997, which abolished the concepts of penal servitude and imprisonment with hard labour and substituted imprisonment in their place. He said that other recommendations remain under consideration in his Department and that any proposals which emerge will be announced in the usual way. He then emphasised to me that it must be pointed out, however, that the report specifically recommends against the introduction of statutory sentencing guidelines.

Therefore, he is saying on one hand that there is a great deal of merit in what is proposed in relation to not tying the hands of the Judiciary but, on the other, he is flying in the face of that particular tenet or piece of advice by effectively tying the hands of the Judiciary by saying there must be a ten year sentence or nothing. I agree there is something of an escape clause, in section 5(3C), which states that “subsection (3B) of this section shall not apply where the court is satisfied that there are exceptional and specific circumstances relating to the offence”. I do not know exactly what the Minister is trying to do. It is a case of “Now you see it, now you don't”. It seems to be some sort of confidence trick, on one hand, and, on the other, he seems to be saying full-bloodedly, chest out, that a full ten year sentence will be given.

On the basis of the arguments that have been made, I ask the Minister to reflect and reconsider his attitude because it simply does not make sense.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I appreciate Deputy Gregory's support for the general thrust of the Bill, particularly his support for the ten year mini[844] mum sentence. That is important because I know, from dealing with this problem as an Opposition spokesman and as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, how involved Deputy Gregory has been in this whole battle and how parts of his constituency have been severely affected by this problem.

What is then left to decide is whether the ten year sentence should, as is Deputy Gregory's opinion, only relate to heroin or whether it should also relate to other drugs. My reply is that I am in no way lessening the impact of the ten year minimum sentence on heroin dealing by broadening the scope of the provision to include other drugs. Deputy Gregory will understand, better than most, my reasons for that when I explain them.

The first is that people who have £10,000 worth of drugs or more in their possession for supply are not small dealers. More often than not they are big dealers who are also involved in organised criminal conspiracies for the sale and supply of illegal drugs to people in this country, particularly in this city. If I start making distinctions between dealers who supply ecstasy tablets with a street value of more than £10,000 to school children and dealers who supply heroin worth more than £10,000 to young people, I will enter into a quagmire and will lessen the impact of the legislation.

That is not to say that I do not have some sympathy with the argument he makes. However, I suggest that the better way is not to reduce or eliminate the minimum sentence in respect of people dealing in lesser drugs but to increase the sentence for those trafficking and dealing in harder drugs. In this respect, the Misuse of Drugs Acts are still there and sentences of up to life imprisonment can be imposed by the courts.

I am not saying that a person who traffics in cannabis worth £10,000 or more should get the same sentence as a person trafficking in heroin worth £1 million. I am saying that a person trafficking in either will get a minimum sentence of ten years but, obviously, the court will have to take the scale of the offence into account. The fact that there is a ten year minimum sentence would not prevent the court imposing a sentence of up to life imprisonment for what it might regard as a more serious offence. I believe that is the better option and I, too, debated in my mind the pros and cons of the argument expressed today by Deputy Gregory.

Question put: “That the words proposed to be deleted stand.”

Tá

Ahern, Bertie.
Ahern, Dermot.
Ahern, Michael.
Ahern, Noel.
Ardagh, Seán.
Aylward, Liam.
Brady, Johnny.

Brady, Martin.
Brennan, Matt.
Brennan, Séamus.
Browne, John (Wexford).
Callely, Ivor.
Carey, Pat. Collins, Michael.[845]

Tá–continued

Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
Coughlan, Mary.
Cowen, Brian.
Cullen, Martin.
Daly, Brendan.
de Valera, Síle.
Dennehy, John.
Doherty, Seán.
Ellis, John.
Fleming, Seán.
Flood, Chris.
Foley, Denis.
Fox, Mildred.
Hanafin, Mary.
Harney, Mary.
Haughey, Seán.
Healy-Rae, Jackie.
Jacob, Joe.
Keaveney, Cecilia.
Kelleher, Billy.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Killeen, Tony.
Kirk, Séamus.
Kitt, Michael.
Kitt, Tom.
Lawlor, Liam.

[846] Lenihan, Brian.
Lenihan, Conor.
McCreevy, Charlie.
McDaid, James.
McGennis, Marian.
Molloy, Robert.
Moloney, John.
Moynihan, Michael.
Ó Cuív, Éamon.
O'Dea, Willie.
O'Donoghue, John.
O'Flynn, Noel.
O'Hanlon, Rory.
O'Keeffe, Batt.
O'Keeffe, Ned.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
Roche, Dick.
Ryan, Eoin.
Smith, Brendan.
Smith, Michael.
Treacy, Noel.
Wade, Eddie.
Wallace, Dan.
Wallace, Mary.
Walsh, Joe.
Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.
Barnes, Monica.
Barrett, Seán.
Belton, Louis.
Boylan, Andrew.
Bradford, Paul.
Broughan, Thomas.
Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
Bruton, John.
Bruton, Richard.
Burke, Ulick.
Carey, Donal.
Clune, Deirdre.
Coveney, Simon.
Crawford, Seymour.
Creed, Michael.
Currie, Austin.
D'Arcy, Michael.
Deasy, Austin.
Durkan, Bernard.
Enright, Thomas.
Farrelly, John.
Finucane, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Flanagan, Charles.
Gilmore, Éamon.
Gormley, John.
Hayes, Brian.
Higgins, Jim.

Higgins, Joe.
Hogan, Philip.
Howlin, Brendan.
Kenny, Enda.
McCormack, Pádraic.
McDowell, Derek.
McGahon, Brendan.
McGinley, Dinny.
McGrath, Paul.
McManus, Liz.
Mitchell, Jim.
Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
Naughten, Denis.
Noonan, Michael.
O'Keeffe, Jim.
O'Shea, Brian.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Owen, Nora.
Quinn, Ruairí.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reynolds, Gerard.
Ring, Michael.
Ryan, Seán.
Sheehan, Patrick.
Spring, Dick.
Stagg, Emmet.
Stanton, David.
Timmins, Billy.
Yates, Ivan.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Callely; Níl, Deputies Barrett and Stagg.

Question declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 7:

In page 7, between lines 46 and 47, to insert the following:

Amendment put and declared lost.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): I move amendment No. 8:

In page 7, to delete lines 47 to 49, and in page 8, to delete lines 1 to 3 and substitute the following:

“(3C) The court in determining the appropriate sentence under subsection (3B) of this section may have regard to any matters it considers”.

Question, “That the words proposed to be deleted stand”, put and declared carried.

[847] Amendment put and declared lost.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 9:

In page 7, line 48, to delete “exceptional and”.

Question, “That the words proposed to be deleted stand”, put and declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: As amendment No. 10 and some subsequent amendments do not arise out of Committee proceedings recommital is necessary in respect of amendment No. 10 and other related amendments. Is it agreed that the amendments be recommitted? Agreed. Amendments Nos. 10 to 13, inclusive, 15 to 18, inclusive, 25, 26, 28 and 29 form a composite proposal. It is agreed to take amendments Nos. 10 to 13, inclusive, 15 to 18, inclusive, 25, 25, 28 and 29 together? Agreed.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendments Nos. 10 to 13, inclusive.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 10:

In page 9, lines 32 and 33, to delete “or the Attorney General”.

These amendments, which are drafting amendments, proposed in the interests of clarity are linked because they deal with the definition of who is the prosecutor for the purposes of Part III of the Bill. Part III deals with amendments to abolish preliminary examinations. A number of sections in Part III refer to the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General being required before an accused is sent forward for trial. However, since the Prosecution of Offences Act, 1974, which created the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions the consent of the Attorney General is only required in a limited number of cases, for example, genocide, treason and offences under fisheries legislation.

In discussions with the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the office of the Attorney General about the terms of the Bill, it was felt that the definition of the “prosecutor” should make it clear that this would only be taken as a reference to the Attorney General in those cases where a prosecution role for the Attorney General was preserved. As a result I am proposing these amendments to the relevant sections to make it clear that reference to the Attorney General relates solely to those offences where the consent of the Attorney General is still required.

Amendments Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13 are amendments to section 8 which defines the “prosecutor” for the purposes of Part III. They provide that reference to the prosecutor should not be taken to be a reference to the Attorney General except in relation to offences where the consent of the Attorney General is still required before such proceedings are instituted or continued.

[848] Amendments Nos. 15 to 18, inclusive, 25, 26, 28 and 29 are consequential and substitute the words “the prosecutor” in place of references to the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Attorney General or the prosecution where they appear in Part III.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 11:

In page 9, to delete line 37.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 12:

In page 9, lines 40 and 41, to delete “or the Attorney General”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 13:

In page 9, line 43, to delete “offence.”.” and substitute the following:

“offence.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), references to the prosecutor in Parts 1A, II and III shall be construed, in relation to offences for which proceedings may not be instituted or continued except by, or on behalf or with the consent of, the Attorney General, as references to the Attorney General.'.”.

Amendment agreed to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendment No. 14 arises from Committee Stage proceedings. Amendment No. 19 is related and both amendments may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): I move amendment No. 14:

In page 10, to delete lines 5 to 31.

Part III sets about abolishing pre-trial procedures. I totally oppose the Minister's proposals because he is seeking to abolish one of the central elements of the criminal justice system, the preliminary examination of indictable offences in the District Court. As I said on Second Stage, this has been a long standing hobby horse of the Minister and he tried to accomplish it in the past by tabling an amendment to that effect to the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill during its passage through the Oireachtas. The Minister will recall that the then Minister for Justice, Deputy Owen, reasonably and sensibly referred the matter to the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure.

In February 1997, the 24th committee responded by issuing its interim report, entitled Preliminary Examination of Indictable Offences. As Deputy Howlin said, it is worth considering the membership of the committee. It comprised Mr. Justice John Blaney, then a senior member of [849] the Supreme Court and now retired, Mr. Justice Robert Barr of the High Court, the late President of the Circuit Court, Judge Frank Spain, the President of the District Court, Judge Peter Smithwick, a senior counsel, a junior counsel, two solicitors and three other members. When the committee reported in February 1997, its main recommendation was to the effect that the preliminary examination system does not significantly delay the criminal process, remains an important safeguard for an accused person and should not, therefore, be abolished. The position could not be clearer.

I listened to the Minister advocate his viewpoint and he appears to favour the abolition on the basis that time will be saved. However, a committee, which was commissioned by the then Minister and comprised experts with hands on experience of the courts and who knew exactly what was happening, stated in its report in February 1997 that it would not save time. It said that the amount of time lost in pre-trial procedures is relatively paltry and there is no hint that it should be changed. It is obvious from the recommendations that it should not be touched.

It was one of the central planks of the Minister's manifesto and part of the zero tolerance concept, the idea of which is to get people to trial as quickly as possible using fast track procedures. Such procedures are fine in certain instances but they are not suitable when one is dealing with fundamental issues of justice and people's rights.

I acknowledge that the committee made valuable recommendations on the taking of depositions and other matters which the Minister has taken on board. However, the sole basis on which the Minister is proposing to abolish the preliminary examination is that a high percentage of those who undergo such an examination are sent forward for trial. Information is refused in only a small number of cases and this is the nub of the problem. The preliminary examination is a valuable filtering device to ensure that persons are not put on trial with all that entails and the cost involved unless there is credible evidence against them. The vast majority of defendants may be sent forward for trial, but the few who are not sent forward are the worry. This is a clear case where the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

The Minister in insisting on this measure is showing utter contempt for the constitutional rights of accused persons in this jurisdiction. It is not good enough to say that if people are not guilty, they should not be tried. If a person is sent forward for trial on scant evidence, the trial may last for several days or, as in a recent case, for several weeks. Even if the person is acquitted, how can he or she hope to regain his or her innocence in the eyes of the community? The trial process and its consequences are a severe punishment.

I accept some changes could be beneficial to the preliminary examination system as recommended by the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure in its report. However, there is no case [850] for abolishing the preliminary examination. Has the Minister considered the cost implications of such a move? For example, more duties will be discharged by counsels who are more expensive than solicitors. Definite cost factors arise from the point of view of litigants.

As in the previous case, what statistics, estimates and figures show that this fundamental change is justified? What are the benefits? The firm conclusion of the committee which reported in February 1997 was that it will not speed up trials. Books of evidence are unlikely to be prepared more quickly just because there is no preliminary examination. The provision tampers with a fundamental procedure which has stood the test of time and served the State, defendants and the system well. It is a fundamental cornerstone and it should not be tampered with just to give further credence to something which was promised and probably was well meaning when the Minister was in Opposition but which does not stand up to scrutiny.

Mr. Howlin: I endorse the arguments put forward by Deputy Higgins. Most people who have considered this matter and listened to the case put forward by the Minister are at a loss to understand why he is still wedded to this course of action. This Part of the Bill will abolish the preliminary examination which usually takes place in the District Court. This move will remove a further protection from the accused and its abolition will not have much effect in combating crime or in speeding up the administration of justice, which is the stated motivation of the Minister. Most amazingly, it runs counter to the recommendations of an expert committee which was set up by a Minister for Justice to advise on the matter.

The Committee on Court Practice and Procedure was chaired by the former member of the Supreme Court, Mr. Justice Blaney, and included all the luminaries I and Deputy Higgins mentioned. Surely their opinion must weigh on the Minister. Another member of the committee was the former Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Jim Tunney, and the Minister has also rejected his experience and deliberations in not accepting the recommendation. The Minister's colleague, Deputy McGennis, was also a learned member of the committee. All their expertise has been rejected by the Minister, although he has taken on board other recommendations. I am at a loss to understand why this learned opinion from a cross section of legal practitioners, judges, senior counsel and public representatives is not sufficient to persuade the Minister of the incorrectness of his approach to this matter. However, I will wait to see if he is prepared to change his approach.

It should be a characteristic of any Minister to be open to argument from the Opposition benches, despite what is written in the briefing note which always begins with “I have to reject [851] the amendments tabled by the Deputies opposite”. That is pro forma. It is written before any argument is made on this side of the House. I hope this Minister, like many of his predecessors, will be open to making his own mind up on the floor of the House, as is right and proper in a parliamentary assembly of this sort.

Amendment No. 19 relates to section 4B(3) on the serving of additional documents. Section 4C(1) states that “at any time after service of the documents mentioned in section 4B(1), the prosecutor shall cause the following documents to be served on the accused or his solicitor, if any:” and then lists the documents. I want to insert after section 4B(1) the simple phrase “but as soon thereafter as it is practicable to do so,”. That short but important phrase will be a safeguard to all the parties in the case.

In the Bill there is no requirement that this be done speedily or as soon as is practicable. That is an important matter. This amendment is to ensure that, after the service of the original book of evidence, where the prosecution wants to serve additional evidence it should do so as soon as is practicable. The interests of justice require that, not only to ensure that both prosecution and defence have fair play, but to ensure there is no subsequent review of the case on the basis that late or inadequate notice was given to one party.

I hope that minor amendment can be accepted. If the thrust of the argument made by Deputy Jim Higgins, myself and others is rejected by the Minister and he is still wedded to ensure that Part 3 of the Bill is enacted, he might at least have regard to this amendment to make a positive contribution to achieve the objective he has set, even though I am not convinced that Part 3 is a good proposal in itself.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The purpose of Deputy Higgins' amendment is to delete the new section 4A. The current procedure surrounding preliminary examinations can be quite cumbersome and the cause of needless delay. In the context of reducing delays in bringing persons to trial, the Bill abolishes preliminary examinations. Section 4A, which is a cornerstone of the new procedures the Bill is introducing, provides that the function of the District Court in the case of an accused who is to be tried on indictment will be to send that person forward to the trial court. The District Court will not be involved in examining the book of evidence or deciding if there is a case to answer. The effect of Deputy Higgins' amendment would be to revert in practice to the preliminary examination system. If I was to accept that, there would be little, if any, point in proceeding with the other provisions relating to preliminary examinations.

Amendment No. 19 is unnecessary. It seeks to place an obligation on the Director of Public Prosecutions to serve any additional documents as soon as it is practicable to do so. If the Deputy's concern is that the accused will have suf[852] ficient time to study the additional documents, I assure him this will be the case. The court on which the documents will also have to be served will be careful to ensure that an accused has had ample opportunity to examine the case against him or her. To include a specific statutory requirement that additional documents be served as soon as practicable could lead to endless disputation in court as to whether something had been done as soon as practicable. This would not only be undesirable but the courts can be relied on to vindicate the rights of the accused at all stages of the proceedings. In the circumstances the amendment is unnecessary and I cannot accept it.

Mr. Howlin: Unnecessary or undesirable?

Mr. O'Donoghue: In the course of the debate, Deputies Higgins and Howlin have argued strongly for the retention of the preliminary examination system. At other times, in this and other fora, they take the opportunity of wishing to reform Irish criminal law. The preliminary examination, as it exists in this State, has a history which dates back to the 16th or 17th century. In seeking to maintain this provision on our statute books as we enter the new millennium, I congratulate Deputies Higgins and Howlin on their reforming zeal.

Mr. Howlin: Some things have served us well, such as habeus corpus. Is that not true?

Mr. O'Donoghue: It was introduced as a safeguard against the laying of an indictment against an accused person without some determination that there was a sufficient case for the accused to answer. It introduced an independent determination of the case being put by the prosecution authority. Since 1974, the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has performed the role of bringing an independent determination of the case being put against an accused person. In those circumstances it is no longer essential that the preliminary examination procedure be retained.

Deputy Higgins cited a committee which was set up by his predecessor and, because of its membership, I should agree with its conclusions. There is a difference between this Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the previous one.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): A big difference.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I do not agree with the committee's recommendations.

Mr. Howlin: Il Duce.

Mr. O'Donoghue: My proposals are more realistic as we enter the new millennium and I will be proved to be correct in due course.

Mr. Howlin: That is arrogance.

[853]Mr. O'Donoghue: It is not a question of arrogance, it is a question of doing what is best by the people. This is the place to do it. It is a matter for the legislators in this House to decide how best to proceed. We can take what advice we like, that is a different matter, but at the end of the day it is for the Members of this House to decide the correct legislative proposal.

Mr. Howlin: The Minister cannot ignore the opinions of the people recommending it to him.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy must desist interrupting.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The last time that criminal procedure was amended in a major way was in 1967. There has been considerable change since 1967. I wonder if Deputies are aware that it is necessary, and accused persons can insist in this age of modern technology, that every word of their depositions be taken down in longhand. Now the reforming zeal of Deputies Higgins and Howlin extends to the maintenance of a procedure which would insist, as we enter the year 2000, on depositions being taken down in longhand. I do not know what the Deputies have against computers, that is a matter for them.

Mr. Howlin: That is patent nonsense.

Mr. O'Donoghue: As we move to the issue of contempt for constitutional rights, nothing could be further from the truth. It is set out in this legislation that an individual who feels that there is not a case to answer, the documents having been served upon him or her, may apply to the court of trial and seek to have the case dismissed. What has changed? We are abolishing an outdated, arcane procedure which has no place in a modern corpus of criminal law in this State. I have no doubt of that. If I wanted further evidence, it is that only a minuscule number of cases in the Dublin Metropolitan District which come by way of preliminary examination to the District Court are dismissed at that point. I do not understand how anybody could make the argument that it is more expeditious and reasonable to proceed as we always proceeded just because that is the way it was done. That is not the way I do business.

On the question of the documents which will be served, there is a provision in the legislation to ensure the matter will be expeditious. It is provided in the legislation that documents must be served within 42 days. That speeds matters up considerably. I have given the matter deep consideration. This proposal is not only just and reasonable but it is necessary. Far from being a more expensive procedure it will be a far less expensive procedure for the simple reason that we will no longer have a continuous in and out to and from the District Court in relation to this matter.

The Opposition Members cannot have it both ways. They cannot state on television and on the [854] radio, which is the new mantra, that the Minister is not in control of his Department—

Mr. Howlin: It is a statement of fact.

Mr. O'Donoghue: —and on the other hand say that the Minister should be controlled by committees, commissions and interdepartmental committees. The leader in this particular mantra is Deputy Rabbitte who, I understand, stated recently that the Minister is an able and compassionate man but he is not in control of his Department. Deputy Rabbitte is an able and compassionate man also but he is not in control of his tongue.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): Obviously the Minister is being briefed by the Government's media monitoring agency in relation to Deputy Rabbitte and Deputy Howlin. The bewildering logic of the Minister is mind-boggling. Obviously the rights of refugees or defendants before the courts do not figure high on the Minister's agenda. He has not even taken the trouble to read the report. He made the point that Deputy Howlin and myself are trying to insist that the old practice of taking depositions in longhand should be retained. If the Minister went to the trouble of reading the report of the committee, which was sent to his Department in February 1997, he would know that major reforms in taking of depositions were proposed. That is what should happen. The system should be changed.

The Minister told us on Committee Stage that he had read the report and accepted some of the arguments made by me and the late Deputy Upton but he took advice from other practitioners. Who are the other practitioners? I do not know of anybody who agrees with the proposal to do away with—

Mr. Howlin: Like “Dev” the Minister looked into his heart.

Mr. O'Donoghue: That might not be a bad idea.

Mr. Howlin: He would have to find it first.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): What is happening now is not acceptable. The preliminary hearing has always been an essential part of allowing defendants to gain timely access to the facts of the cases against them and empowering a judge to throw out manifestly weak cases, and it has served the system well. That is now at stake and it is particularly worrying because this extends the anti-defendant agenda to all defendants, rather than just to drug barons. We want to deal harshly with drug barons but everybody now appearing in court will find themselves deprived of the right of preliminary hearings. The abolition of the preliminary hearing is another attack on legal protection for suspects and defendants and on the discretionary powers of judges. That is fundamentally wrong. Rather than doggedly bull[855] dozing ahead with this measure the Minister should think again because time will prove that it is foolhardy and tampers with the fundamental rights of defendants.

Mr. Howlin: The Minister will eventually learn that simply being dogged on a matter does not mean he is right. Everybody is out of step but the Minister. He should examine his conscious and not dismiss as another quango or another committee eminent personages including Supreme Court and High Court judges and Members and former Members of this House in the way he does, and he should not insist that everybody is wrong except him. The Minister seems to have the notion that we cannot examine any report. Apparently any report commissioned by the former Minister, Deputy Owen, will not be examined. That is a peculiar prejudice on the part of the Minister and it is a damaging one in terms of reaching proper conclusions.

An hour or so ago I asked the Minister when there would be comprehensive video and audio recording of the questioning of accused persons and he said he had set up a committee to examine the issue. Now the Minister is saying a committee is not acceptable and he will decide all. The Minister cannot have it both ways. If a committee has to be set up to decide how to install technology into Garda stations, surely the voice of a distinguished committee on the fundamental matter of the rights of accused persons should also bear with the Minister in some way. The Minister should not dismiss us because we want to retain something that is valuable.

There are many valuable legal precepts going back over 300 or 400 years. The Minister might accept that the issue of habeas corpus is an important concept in law, although the administration of habeas corpus leaves a great deal to be desired, judging by a reply to a parliamentary question yesterday. No doubt that issue will be revisited on another occasion. These old concepts are important and I join Deputy Higgins in counselling the Minister to think again on this important issue. The Minister said my amendment No. 19, was not necessary. Necessary or not, it is an additional safeguard I ask him to include in the legislation.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I am as concerned about the rights of refugees as I am about the rights of accused persons. What I am proposing is not prejudicial to accused persons. The book of evidence sets out the case against the accused. The preliminary examination is not necessary for this purpose. Deputy Howlin misinterpreted my views on the committee's report. I did not say that all committees are useless. I said I dis[856] agreed with the findings of this committee's report. I doubt if Deputy Howlin, when he was Minister for Health and Minister for the Environment, agreed with every report he received. I am sure if he did not agree with a report, he would be the first not to accept it. There is nothing unusual in my not agreeing with the report. I do not agree with it and therefore I do not intend to retain an archaic system which has outlived its usefulness to criminal procedures.

There is no question of any individual's constitutional rights being abrogated in any way by this measure. That argument does not stand up. I am trying to achieve an improvement in the hearing of criminal trials. It is true that preliminary examinations are delaying trials. If I move, as I will, to abolish these preliminary examinations which, for the most part, are a wasteful exercise, it will mean that criminal trials will be heard more expeditiously. That is part of my plan for the criminal justice system. I have a fairly straightforward jigsaw of thoughts to put together in order to complete my plans. Once trials are processed more expeditiously, the Courts Service Board and the Prisons Authority are in place and new prison spaces are provided, we will have a reformed criminal justice system as we enter the new millennium.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): We are all in favour of a reformed system. We want to update procedures and ensure that we do whatever is possible to improve the criminal justice system and the courts system. However, the preliminary hearing has been a fundamental part of our court procedure. I support the elimination of time wasting procedures and the unnecessary attendance of gardaí in courts. This issue goes to the heart of the criminal justice system, due process and the protection of the rights of citizens who find themselves before the courts. This proposal is a serious infringement of fundamental rights which have been protected by preliminary trial proceedings.

No one wishes the Minister to be controlled by committees. However, I do not understand why he will not have recourse to the measured advice of the expert committee which reported to his predecessor, Deputy Owen, and which was on his desk when he took office. Why did he not debunk a foolhardy proposal which formed part of his zero tolerance proposals? These proposals included the elimination of pre-trial proceedings, mandatory minimum sentencing and whatever else he wished to add to the stew which formed part of his manifesto and to which he has credited so much of the Government's electoral success.

Question put: “That the woers proposed to be deleted stand.”

[857] Tá

Ahern, Dermot.
Ahern, Michael.
Ahern, Noel.
Ardagh, Seán.
Aylward, Liam.
Brady, Johnny.
Brady, Martin.
Brennan, Matt.
Brennan, Séamus.
Browne, John (Wexford).
Byrne, Hugh.
Callely, Ivor.
Carey, Pat.
Collins, Michael.
Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
Coughlan, Mary.
Cowen, Brian.
Cullen, Martin.
Daly, Brendan.
de Valera, Síle.
Dennehy, John.
Doherty, Seán.
Ellis, John.
Fahey, Frank.
Fleming, Seán.
Flood, Chris.
Foley, Denis.
Fox, Mildred.
Hanafin, Mary.
Haughey, Seán.
Healy-Rae, Jackie.
Jacob, Joe.
Keaveney, Cecilia.

[858] Kelleher, Billy.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Killeen, Tony.
Kirk, Séamus.
Kitt, Michael.
Kitt, Tom.
Lawlor, Liam.
Lenihan, Brian.
Lenihan, Conor.
McCreevy, Charlie.
McDaid, James.
McGennis, Marian.
Molloy, Robert.
Moloney, John.
Moynihan, Michael.
Ó Cuív, Éamon.
O'Dea, Willie.
O'Donoghue, John.
O'Flynn, Noel.
O'Hanlon, Rory.
O'Keeffe, Batt.
O'Keeffe, Ned.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
O'Malley, Desmond.
Roche, Dick.
Ryan, Eoin.
Smith, Brendan.
Smith, Michael.
Treacy, Noel.
Wade, Eddie.
Wallace, Dan.
Wallace, Mary.
Walsh, Joe.
Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.
Barnes, Monica.
Barrett, Seán.
Belton, Louis.
Boylan, Andrew.
Bradford, Paul.
Broughan, Thomas.
Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
Bruton, Richard.
Burke, Ulick.
Clune, Deirdre.
Coveney, Simon.
Crawford, Seymour.
Creed, Michael.
Currie, Austin.
D'Arcy, Michael.
Deasy, Austin.
Durkan, Bernard.
Enright, Thomas.
Farrelly, John.
Finucane, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Flanagan, Charles.
Gilmore, Éamon.
Gormley, John.
Hayes, Brian.

Higgins, Jim.
Hogan, Philip.
Howlin, Brendan.
Kenny, Enda.
McCormack, Pádraic.
McDowell, Derek.
McGahon, Brendan.
McGinley, Dinny.
McGrath, Paul.
McManus, Liz.
Mitchell, Olivia.
Naughten, Denis.
Noonan, Michael.
O'Keeffe, Jim.
O'Shea, Brian.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Owen, Nora.
Perry, John.
Quinn, Ruairí.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reynolds, Gerard.
Ring, Michael.
Sargent, Trevor.
Sheehan, Patrick.
Stanton, David.
Timmins, Billy.
Yates, Ivan.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S.Brennan and Callely; Níl, Deputies Barrett and Rabbitte.

Question declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendment Nos. 15 to 18, inclusive.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 15:

In page 10, lines 16 and 17, to delete “the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

[859] Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 16:

In page 10, lines 18 and 19, to delete “either the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 17:

In page 10, lines 26 and 27, to delete “the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 18:

In page 10, lines 32 and 33, to delete “the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments reported.

Acting Chairman (Mr. McGrath): Amendment No. 19 has already been discussed with amendment No. 14.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 19:

In page 11, line 35, after “section 4B(1),” to insert “but as soon thereafter as it is practicable to do so,”.

I am gravely disappointed that this very minor additional safeguard will not be accepted by the Minister.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 20 has already been discussed with amendment No. 1.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendment No. 20.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 20:

In page 12, between lines 38 and 39, to insert the following:

“(b) In paragraph (a) “oral evidence” includes–

(i) any evidence given through a live television link pursuant to Part III of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992, or section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1999, or

(ii) a videorecording of any evidence given through a live television link pursuant to that Part or section in proceedings under section 4F.”.

Amendment agreed to.

[860] Amendment reported.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 21:

In page 12, to delete lines 50 and 51, and in page 13, to delete lines 1 to 10.

The purpose of this amendment is to delete the power to appeal the acquittal of the accused to the Court of Criminal Appeal. This is a major change in the criminal justice system as up to now an acquittal could be appealed. The section provides a fundamental change in the law, which is a very undesirable, and merits very careful consideration. There are a number of basic principles of double jeopardy, etc. The notion is that once a person has been before a court and acquitted that is the end of the matter. I would have grave concern if that element of the Bill was passed without challenge. I was not involved in the debate on Second and Committee Stages, but I am at a loss to know why the Minister wants to make such a fundamental change in the code of criminal law. It is a significant change in the criminal justice system and one which I certainly cannot support.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The amendment is designed to remove the right of the Director of Public Prosecutions to appeal against the decision of the trial court on the application of the accused to dismiss the charge against him or her. Currently, if the District Court, having conducted a preliminary examination, decides a sufficient case is not disclosed to put the accused on trial it can discharge the accused. In these circumstances the Director of Public Prosecutions would have the option to have the decision reviewed in a higher court. Subsections (7) and (8) of section 4E, the subsections the Deputy wishes to delete, give the DPP the right to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal against a decision of the trial court to dismiss the charge. The subsections are in effect simply providing in the Bill the right for the DPP to have the earlier decision reviewed in the Court of Criminal Appeal. It will be for that court to decide whether the earlier decision should stand or whether the trial of the accused should proceed. Given that subsections (7) and (8) represent a continuation, albeit in a different form, of the existing right of the DPP in relation to a decision to dismiss a charge, I must reject the amendment.

Mr. Howlin: I expected a fuller explanation as to why this is the case. It provides for a fundamental change in criminal law. There must always be a presumption of innocence until there is compelling evidence to the contrary, and the idea that a court decision that there is insufficient evidence to convict can be appealed is a very worrying development. I thought the Minister would have provided a better defence of his position. I hope he will provide such a defence to convince me of the necessity of the change he is suggesting which is part of a process, evident in the Bill, of eroding citizens' rights. Potentially any of us could appear [861] before the courts. While we want desperately to ensure that people guilty of serious offences such as those covered in this Bill spend a long time behind bars, we also want to ensure that nobody innocently ends up behind bars. We should insert provisions which protect the safeguards that have long been an established part of our law. Whatever the background in terms of ensuring we present a very tough face to the criminal we should not compromise on citizens' rights and the protection of the accused.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): I support the thrust of the argument made by Deputy Howlin. We are talking about another fundamental erosion of something which has previously been enshrined in legislation. Given that we are dealing with a fundamental issue one would have expected that the Minister would have fleshed out in greater detail the rationale behind the proposal. However, he has not done so. The House has a responsibility to demand clear, cogent, comprehensive and well argued reasons for changing something so fundamental.

Acting Chairman: Is the Deputy pressing the amendment?

Mr. Howlin: Is there a possibility that the Minister might at least argue his case more —

Mr. O'Donoghue: It is not a fundamental change. I oppose the amendment as the new provision is merely a continuation of the current procedure in a different form. A decision to dismiss a charge, dealt with in section 4E, is not an acquittal as the Deputy contends. Therefore, there is no question of a fundamental change in procedure. The current position is that a District Court can discharge an accused person if it decides there is an insufficient case. The Director of Public Prosecutions is entitled to appeal that decision to the next highest court. The new procedure will allow the accused to go to the court of trial and seek to have the charges dismissed on the basis that a sufficient case has not been set out. The court may discharge the accused and the DPP, instead of appealing to a court higher than the District Court, will now appeal to a court higher than the court of trial, namely, the Court of Criminal Appeal. There will be a parallel procedure, albeit in a higher court, and there is no question of an individual's constitutional rights being abrogated in any way, which would be the last thing I would seek to do.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 22 has already been discussed with amendment No. 1.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendments Nos. 22 and 23.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 22:

[862] In page 13, to delete lines 11 to 50, and in page 14, to delete lines 1 and 2 and substitute the following:

“4F.–(1) At any time after the accused is sent forward for trial, the prosecutor or the accused may apply to the trial court for an order requiring a person to appear before a judge of the District Court so that the person's evidence may be taken either—

(a) by way of sworn deposition, or

(b) in case the person's evidence is to be given through a live television link pursuant to Part III of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992, or section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1999, through such a link,

whether or not the person's name appears in the list of witnesses served on the accused under section 4B or 4C.

(2) If satisfied that it would be in the interests of justice to do so, the trial court may order a person who is the subject of an application under subsection (1) to attend before a judge of the District Court in the district court district—

(a) in which the offence was committed, or

(b) in which the accused was arrested or resides,

so that the judge may take the person's evidence accordingly.

(3) The following rules shall apply to the taking of evidence under this section–

(a) when the evidence is being taken, both the accused and a judge of the District Court shall be present;

(b) before it is taken, the judge shall inform the accused of the circumstances in which it may be admitted in evidence at the accused's trial;

(d) where the evidence is taken by way of sworn deposition, the deposition and any cross-examination and re-examination of the deponent shall be recorded, read to the deponent and signed by the deponent and the judge.

(4) A judge of the District Court shall have the same powers for–

(a) enforcing compliance by a prospective witness with this section or with an order under this section, and

(b) securing the attendance of the accused,

as the District Court has in relation to witnesses in criminal proceedings.”.

[863] Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 23:

In page 14, to delete lines 3 to 16 and substitute the following:

4G.–(1) A deposition taken under section 4F may be considered by the trial court on an application under section 4E(1).

(2) Such a deposition may be admitted in evidence at the trial of the accused if it is proved that—

(a) the witness–

(i) is dead,

(ii) is unable to attend to give evidence at the trial,

(iii) is prevented from so attending, or

(iv) does not give evidence at the trial through fear or intimidation,

(b) the accused was present at the taking of the evidence, and

unless the court is of opinion that to do so would not be in the interests of justice.

(3) Subject to section 16 (admissibility at trial of videorecording of evidence given by witness under 17) of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992, a videorecording of evidence given through a live television link in proceedings under section 4F shall, if the accused was present at the taking of the evidence and an opportunity was given to cross-examine and re-examine the witness, be admissible at the trial of the offence with which the accused is charged as evidence of any fact stated therein of which direct oral evidence by the witness would be admissible, unless the court is of opinion that in the interests of justice the videorecording ought not to be so admitted.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments reported.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 24:

In page 16, line 17, after “oath” to insert “or affirmation”.

This amendment is simply designed to make it clear that the court can receive evidence on affirmation as well as under oath. I anticipate the Minister will react to this amendment as he did to others by saying it is unnecessary. However, it would be no harm to include the amendment to avoid doubt.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The section to which this amendment relates is that which provides for the issue of witness orders. Where the court is satis[864] fied by evidence given on oath that a person is unlikely to comply with a witness order, it has power to compel compliance. As Deputy Howlin said, his amendment is designed to put it beyond doubt that such evidence may also be given by affirmation. I appreciate Deputy Howlin's intention, but I cannot accept the amendment—

Mr. Howlin: Why?

Mr. O'Donoghue: —because the matter is already covered by the interpretation Act of 1937 which provides for the—

Mr. Howlin: The Minister could accept it for the sake of generosity.

Mr. O'Donoghue: — interpretation of expressions and words contained in Acts of the Oireachtas as set out in the Schedule to the Act. Paragraph 20 of the Schedule states that the word “oath” in the case of persons for the time being allowed by law to affirm instead of swearing includes affirmation. Paragraph 31 provides that the definition of the word “swear” includes “affirm”. Under the Oaths Act, 1888, any person who objects to being sworn is permitted to make a solemn affirmation instead of taking an oath. The Deputy's amendment is, therefore, unnecessary. It might create confusion or uncertainty to include it in the Bill since other Acts already do so.

I am aware that the Law Reform Commission has reported on the matter. It would be best to deal with it in the context of any reform of the law relating to oaths and affirmations generally. I cannot, therefore, accept the amendment.

Mr. Howlin: Uniquely, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform must find a reason to say “no” and reject the mildest and most innocuous of amendments. The Minister has a responsibility to the House to say, “That is a load of nonsense.” I have received umpteen recommendations that the matter is already covered in the Interpretation Act. Acts and Bills should be able to be read as stand-alone documents by ordinary citizens. The words “oath” and “affirmation” should be included to avoid confusion and the need to consult the Interpretation Act. The purpose of the amendment is to ensure clarity.

The notion that some reason must be found to say “no” on every issue undermines due process in the House. Rather than listen to arguments, no matter how well or badly made, and make up his mind on their merits the Minister provides his prepared notes for rubber-stamping. I ask him to reconsider, if only to acknowledge that the House has a function other than to rubber-stamp the notes prepared in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I have operated for most of the afternoon without notes.

[865]Mr. Howlin: The Minister read the same ones twice.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The amendment is unnecessary. It is not the function of the House to bring forward legislation to make something clearer.

Mr. Howlin: That is an amazing statement. It is done in consolidation Bills all the time.

Mr. O'Donoghue: It is clear that it is already included in legislation. Why would I want to make it any clearer? That is tautolgy of the worst kind.

Mr. Howlin: It is not clear.

Mr. O'Donoghue: It is included in the Interpretation Act. It is like saying that I went to bed last night and had better sleep again last night. It is nonsense.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): The Minister is not doing himself any favours in adopting this attitude. He commented that it is not the function of the House to bring forward legislation to make something clearer. Has he thought this through or was it off the top of the head?

Mr. Howlin: He should withdraw it.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I will not.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): We have been dealing with substantial issues since 10.30 a.m. relating to the Constitution, the criminal justice system, the courts and the rights of citizens. Deputy Howlin and I have attempted at length to get the Minister to see the logic of our arguments in three or four areas where he has decided to introduce fundamental changes which were part of a mission statement compiled in opposition.

The Minister will not accept the thrust of any of our arguments. The amendment is logical. Deputy Howlin wishes to include the words “or affirmation” to put the matter beyond yea or nay. Even if it is unnecessary or superfluous, for once the Minister should cease to be the prisoner of his Department and be his own man.

Mr. O'Donoghue: One cannot legislate with gestures.

Mr. Howlin: The Minister should act as such, not as a cipher.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): Without referring to his notes and as a gesture, the Minister should show independence of spirit and thought by accepting at least one amendment.

Mr. Howlin: The Minister is deaf to the will of the Oireachtas. This should be a chamber where the voices of all Members are weighed. Everything should not be decided in the Department before the Minister comes to the House and reads [866] his prepared notes. This is a minor amendment. We have a duty to prepare laws that are accessible to the citizen. The purpose of consolidation Acts is to ensure clarity. The Minister is the prisoner of his Department; he is not his own man. He is not free to make the most minor of decisions not sanctioned in advance.

Mr. O'Donoghue: By me.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendment Nos. 25 to 30, inclusive.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 25:

In page 18, lines 42 and 43, to delete “the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 26:

In page 19, lines 4 and 5, to delete “the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 27:

In page 22, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:

“(3) Section 13(1) of the Act of 1992 is hereby amended by the insertion, after 'proceedings', of ‘(including proceedings under section 4E or 4F of the Criminal Precedure Act, 1967)'.”.

The amendment clarifies the relationship between the new Part 1A of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, and the television link provisions of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992. Section 13 of the 1992 Act permits evidence to be given through a live television link in proceedings for sexual and violent offences. It must be the case that a witness entitled to give evidence through a live television link at trial should be equally entitled to do so at hearings prior to trial, namely, hearings under section 4E, application for dismissal of charge, and section 4F, taking of depositions in District Court, which are being inserted by this Bill in the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967. The amendment makes it clear that this is intended by specifying the word “proceedings” in section 13 of the 1992 Act includes proceedings under sections 4E and 4F.

I hope Opposition Deputies will be in a position to accept the amendment. I am beginning to find their arguments incongruous. On the one hand, they are telling me that I should not bring forward a Bill that I drafted in opposition and, on [867] the other, that the Bill is under the control of the Department.

Mr. Howlin: The Bill is not, the Minister is.

Mr. O'Donoghue: They also tell me that I am not listening to committees. When I tell them that I do not agree with the committees they tell me that I am doing what the committees want. This circuitous line of argument, which would be more at home in a maze, does the Deputies no credit. As they are well aware, most of the arguments I have made have been made off the top of my head and clearly.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 28:

In page 22, lines 11 and 12, to delete “the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Attorney General” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 29:

In page 22, line 29, to delete “the prosecution” and substitute “the prosecutor”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 30:

In page 23, to delete lines 7 to 9 and substitute “in proceedings under Part 1A of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, and', and”.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments reported.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 31:

In page 23, to delete lines 35 and 36.

This is a drafting amendment which deletes section 23(2) which states that reference in section 23(1) to “this Part” means Part III of the Bill. The draftsman has advised there is no necessity for section 23(2) since the contents of section 23(1) make clear the reference is to the Bill. If something is made clear, it need not be legislated for again. There is no such thing as legislating in duplicate. It does not happen in any parliament and it would a poor day for the legislative process if we started doing so. It would create considerable confusion and havoc in the system. It is unfair for Deputies to constantly badger my officials for doing their job well.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 32:

In page 26, lines 33 and 34, to delete “, if it considers it appropriate to do so,”.

[868] This amendment relates to Part V and deals with guilty pleas. Section 29(1) reads:

In determining what sentence to pass on a person who has pleaded guilty to an offence, other than an offence for which the sentence is fixed by law, a court, if it considers it appropriate to do so, shall take into account–

The effect of the amendment would be to ensure a court always gives full weight to a guilty plea by deleting what is in essence a let-off clause for a court. There has always been a strong practice of weight and value being given to a guilty plea. It was not a matter of it being an optional issue but that it was understood that, for the fair and efficient administration of justice, there would be an incentive for defendants, where they were obviously guilty, to plead such. That element of discretion, “if it considers it appropriate to do so”, should be deleted so that, in all cases, a court would give full weight to a guilty plea.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): I agree with the thrust of Deputy Howlin's argument. The criminal justice system depends to a large extent on a significant number of defendants pleading guilty. It is not that we want anyone who is innocent to plead guilty, but it is recognised that, if a substantial number of people did not enter guilty pleas, the court system would quickly clog up. For that reason, courts have always been benignly disposed to giving credit to guilty pleas whenever a defendant's motivation for pleading such is clear. If defendants feel they have nothing to gain from entering a guilty plea, they may decide to opt for trial, as they are constitutionally entitled to do. As a result, there is always the possibility they will be acquitted or that a jury will fail to agree. This happened in recent cases after a considerable length of time and at considerable cost leading to a new trial. The system will suffer as a result.

One of the major advantages of a guilty plea, especially in the case of sexual offences, is that it saves the victim from the trauma of having to give evidence. On that score, I welcome the provision of section 29(1) which allows a court to vary the amount of credit given for a guilty plea at the time it was entered. It can greatly help a victim to know at an early that she or he will not have to give evidence in a contested trial. However, the part of the section which states in clear terms, “...a court, if it considers it appropriate to do so, shall take into account...” should be deleted. There should be full recognition at all stages if someone decides to do what they believe is the correct thing and pleads guilty rather than having a contested trial. The phrase, “if it considers it appropriate to do so”, should be deleted thereby ensuring the section would read:

In determining what sentence to pass on a person who has pleaded guilty to an offence, other than an offence for which the sentence is fixed by law, a court shall take into account–

[869] (a) the stage in the proceedings for the offence at which the person indicated an intention to plead guilty, and

(b) the circumstances in which this indication was given.

Simpliciter.

Mr. O'Donoghue: This is another historic section in an historic Bill. The amendment relates to section 29 which sets out on a statutory basis for the first time in criminal law how guilty verdicts are to be dealt with by the courts. Section 29(1) provides that:

In determining what sentence to pass on a person who has pleaded guilty to an offence...a court, if it considers it appropriate to do so, shall take into account–

(a) the stage in the proceedings...at which the person indicated an intention to plead guilty, and

(b) the circumstances in which this indication was given.

The effect of the amendment would be to remove the words “if it considers it appropriate to do so”. In other words, a court would have to have regard to the factors at (a) and (b) in all circumstances, that is, the stage in the proceedings at which the person indicated an intention to plead guilty and the circumstances in which the indication was given.

The inclusion of the words “if it considers it appropriate to do so” is considered desirable so as not to make it an absolute requirement of all courts to take such matters into account regarding all offences. This is for the practical reason that the provision relates to all offences. For example, it would hardly be necessary or desirable for a court to examine these matters for routine road traffic offences. If the amendment were passed and a person were before the District Court on a routine traffic offence, the court would have to take into account the fact that the person indicated an intention to plead guilty at a certain stage and the circumstances in which the indication was given. No one would argue for that.

Case law already exists on when it is appropriate for the courts to take guilty pleas into account. While the proposed section places aspects of that law on a statutory basis, it is unlikely to supplant that case law to the extent it already deals with when it is appropriate to take into account guilty pleas. In that sense, the point of the amendment is already met by law. The amendment would require a court to take into account guilty pleas, especially the circumstances in which they were made, in the most routine of cases, and no benefit would be gained from that. On the contrary, it might needlessly clog up the operation of the courts. In the circumstances, I am not disposed towards accepting the amendment.

[870]Mr. Howlin: I do not agree with the Minister's logic but that will not come as a surprise. The focus should not be on minor cases in the lower courts where such consideration might be inappropriate. The more salient point would be that it should always be taken into account in serious offences in the higher courts. If there is not a positive incentive for people to plead guilty where appropriate, that will clog up the system. Since I did not manage to convince the Minister, I will press the amendment.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): The Minister is giving with one hand and taking with the other. I do not know why he does not leave well enough alone. We are trying to provide people with a reasonable inducement to plead guilty in appropriate cases. By including “if it considers it appropriate to do so”, he is removing the certainty that a discount will be given. Why is there a need to remove that certainty? If it is removed, the Minister also removes a considerable amount of the attraction and inducement of a guilty plea.

The Minister is trying to address a problem arising from a Supreme Court judgment in the case of the DPP v. G. in which it was held that it was wrong in principle to impose the maximum sentence when the defendant had pleaded guilty. The court's reasoning was based on the principle of the interests of the victim. In view of this I ask the Minister to rethink the wisdom of allowing section 29(1) to stand. I support most of the thrust of what is being proposed, but removing the certainty of giving a dividend or a discount following a guilty plea will cause damage and will take away from the spirit of what is a well intentioned section.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The amendment proposes that the courts be obliged in minor matters to take into account the stage at which the indication to plead guilty was given and the circumstances in which it was given. If this was to be accepted the courts would become clogged up. It would make no sense to do that.

Deputy Higgins says I should leave well enough alone. If I did so I would not have bothered to introduce this legislation. Well enough is not good enough.

Mr. Howlin: The Minister has not made a clear case for rejecting the amendment. I do not accept this deletion would clog up the system since it is the status quo. Consideration and weight is given to this aspect and it would take a judge approximately five minutes to consider matters in the instances outlined by the Minister. In view of this his contention does not hold up. The amendment is correct and safe and I intend to press it.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): What is the Minister's attitude to the Supreme Court judgment to which I referred which held that it was wrong in principle to impose the maximum sentence when the defendant had pleaded guilty? When I refer to [871] leaving well enough alone I mean that while the section is good and commendable – I support it – I am concerned at the proposal to remove the element of certainty that should apply to all guilty pleas. The Minister's proposal dilutes considerably the degree of certainty with regard to making allowances for such pleas.

Question, “That the words proposed to be deleted stand”, put and declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

Mr. Howlin: I move amendment No. 33:

In page 29, line 16, to delete “resolutions” and substitute the following:

“resolutions:

Provided that no such resolutions may continue section 9 in operation unless provision is made to the effect that failure to comply with that section (or the fact (if it be a fact) that criminal proceedings in relation to a serious offence within the meaning of that section have not been brought or concluded as the case may be) shall not prejudice the institution or prosecution of civil proceedings arising from the circumstances of the commission of the offence concerned”.

I understood that this was raised by my late colleague, Pat Upton, on Committee Stage. The purpose of the amendment is to overcome a matter that was overlooked during the passage of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act, 1998.

It was argued on Committee Stage that the new section on withholding information with regard to serious offences is very broad. For example, where a plaintiff wants to bring a claim for damages in relation to an assault he or she could be prejudiced by the section if he or she failed to report the assault to the Garda Síochána at the earliest opportunity. That would be grossly unfair in many cases.

I understood the Minister promised my late colleague he would look at this matter and return to it on Report Stage. However, since an amendment in his name did not appear on the Report Stage amendment list I saw fit to resubmit the amendment my late colleague had submitted on Committee Stage. I hope the Minister, by not submitting his own amendment and accepting the thrust of the late Pat Upton's argument on Committee Stage, has decided to accept this amendment.

Mr. O'Donoghue: This matter was raised by the late Pat Upton. The amendment put down by him on Committee Stage also raises an issue with regard to section 9 of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act, 1998. It arises from a concern that the offence of withholding information contained in the 1998 Act may have [872] adverse implications in relation to tort law. The fear is that failure to comply with a statutory obligation to report an offence might prejudice a person in civil proceedings arising from the facts of the offence.

On Committee Stage I said that the amendment raised complex issues and required further investigation, including consultations with the Attorney General and I undertook to consult with him before Report Stage. Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act, 1997, abolished the distinction between felony and misdemeanour. In consequence, the common law offence of misprision of felony was also abolished. However, the Act created offences of assisting offenders – section 7 – and concealing an offence – section 8.

The proposed amendment raises the question of whether an offence similar to that of the former offence of misprision of felony was created by statute. I have had the matter examined in consultation with the Attorney General and I am satisfied that section 9 does not present the problem which the Deputy contends.

Section 9 of the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act, 1998, created an offence of withholding information. Under the section it is an offence for any person who has information which the person knows or believes might be of material assistance in preventing the commission of a serious offence or in securing the apprehension etc., of a person who commits a serious offence and fails without reasonable excuse to disclose it to the Garda. I cannot see how the section could be relevant to civil proceedings in the way the amendment seeks to suggest.

With regard to the question of the civil and criminal proceedings arising out of the same act or omission, there is a well established procedure that the criminal proceedings must be concluded before the civil proceedings can be considered by a court. In this regard, section 9 of the 1998 Act does not change the position.

The other issue it raises is whether a person would be prejudiced in civil proceedings for failure to comply with the provisions of section 9. That section has no relevance to civil proceedings. In any event, it would appear to be a matter for the courts to decide whether, on public policy grounds or otherwise, a person who had been found not to have complied with the provisions of section 9 should be enabled to institute or to maintain civil proceedings arising out of the same circumstances.

While I cannot accept the amendment I wish to acknowledge that this point, which was raised by the late Pat Upton, was one of great complexity and would have required explanation at some future time. In that respect, I am grateful for the fact that it was put down.

Mr. Howlin: I thank the Minister for his reply. As he said, it is a complex matter and on legal advice the danger that presented itself needed to be examined. If the Minister has taken the advice of the Attorney General, has taken time to weigh [873] the possibilities and has concluded that the legislation is safe without the amendment I will accept his argument, provided the civil proceedings that might arise from the example I have given, covering matters such as a claim for damages arising out of an assault which was failed to be notified to the Garda, would not be prejudiced by such failure. In view of this I will withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Bill recommitted in respect of amendments Nos. 34 to 37, inclusive.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 34:

In page 29, after line 30, to insert the following:

“39.–(1) Subject to subsection (2), in any proceedings on indictment for an offence (including proceedings under Part 1A of the Act of 1967) a person other than the accused may, with the leave of the court, give evidence through a live television link.

(2) A court shall not grant leave under subsection (1) unless it is satisfied that the person is likely to be in fear or subject to intimidation in giving evidence otherwise.

(3) Evidence given under subsection (1) shall be videorecorded.

(4) In any proceedings referred to in subsection (1) in any circuit or district court district where the court is satisfied that leave should be granted for evidence to be given through a live television link pursuant to subsection (1) but the necessary facilities for doing so are not available in that circuit or district, the court may by order transfer the proceedings to a circuit or district court district where such facilities are available and, where such an order is made, the jurisdiction of the court to which the proceedings have been transferred may be exercised–

(a) in the case of the Circuit Court, by the judge of the circuit concerned, and

(b) in the case of the District Court, by the judge of that court for the time being assigned to the district court district concerned.

(5) Where evidence is given by a person (‘the witness') through a live television link pursuant to subsection (1)–

(a) in case evidence is given that the accused was known to the witness before the date on which the offence in question is alleged to have been committed, the witness shall not be required to identify the accused, unless the court in the interests of justice directs otherwise, and

(b) in any other case, evidence by a person other than the witness that the witness [874] identified the accused as being the offender at an identification parade or by other means shall be admissible as evidence that the accused was so identified.

(6) This section is without prejudice to any other enactment providing for the giving of evidence through a live television link.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 35:

In page 29, after line 30, to insert the following:

“40.–(1) A person who without lawful authority makes enquiries or takes any other steps whatever, whether within or outside the State, for the purpose of discovering–

(a) the whereabouts of a person whom he or she knows, or reasonably suspects, to be a relocated witness, or

(b) any new name or other particulars related to any new identity provided for such a witness,

shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) A person who without lawful authority discloses, whether within or outside the State, to any other person any information (including information lawfully obtained pursuant to subsection(1)) concerning–

(a) the whereabouts of a person whom he or she knows, or reasonably suspects, to be a relocated witness, or

(b) any new name or other particulars related to any new identity provided for such a person,

shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) In this section ‘relocated witness' means any person who intends to give or has given evidence in proceedings for an offence and who as a consequence has moved residence, under any programme operated by the Garda Síochána for the protection of witnesses, to any place, whether within or outside the State.

(4) In this section ‘lawful authority' means the authority of–

(a) a court in any proceedings involving the relocated witness, or

(b) a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of chief superintendent.

(5) A court shall give authority pursuant to subsection (1) or (2) only if it is satisfied–

(a) that to do so would be in the interests of justice, and

(b) that another way of proceeding which would not prejudice the continued participation of the relocated witness in [875] the programme aforesaid, including, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the transmission of any documents required to be served on the witness to the Commissioner of the Garda Síochána for the purpose of effecting such service, is not available.

(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable–

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 36:

In page 29, after line 30, to insert the following:

“41.–(1) Without prejudice to any provision made by any other enactment or rule of law, a person–

(a) who harms or threatens, menaces or in any other way intimidates or puts in fear another person who is assisting in the investigation by the 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,

(b) with the intention thereby of causing the investigation or the course of justice to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with,

shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) In this section, ‘potential juror' means a person who, at the time an offence under this section is alleged to have been committed, has been summoned for jury service but has not been empanelled as a juror to serve on a particular jury.

(3) In proceedings for an offence under this section, proof to the satisfaction of the court or jury, as the case may be, that the accused did an act referred to in subsection (1)(a) shall be evidence that the act was done with the intention required by subsection (1)(b).

(4) In subsection (1) the reference to a member of a person's family includes a reference to–

(a) the person's spouse,

(b) a parent, grandparent, step-parent, child (including a step-child or an adopted [876] child), grandchild, brother, sister, half-brother, half–sister, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece of the person or his or her spouse, or

(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable–

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, and

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I move amendment No. 37:

In page 29, after line 30, to insert the following:

“42.–(1) In this section—

‘offence' means an arrestable offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Law Act, 1997;

‘prison' means a place of custody administered by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform;

‘prisoner' means a person who is in prison on foot of a sentence of imprisonment, on committal awaiting trial, on remand or otherwise.

(2) A member of the Garda Síochána may arrest a prisoner on the authority of a judge of the District Court who is satisfied on information supplied on oath by a member of the Garda Síochána not below the rank of superintendent that the following conditions are fulfilled—

(a) there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the prisoner has committed an offence other than an offence in respect of which he or she is imprisoned;

(b) the arrest of the prisoner is necessary for the proper investigation of the offence which he or she is suspected of having committed;

(c) where the prisoner has previously been arrested for the same offence, whether prior to his or her imprisonment or under this section, further relevant information has since come to the knowledge of the Garda Síochána.

(3) A person arrested under this section–

(a) shall be taken forthwith to a Garda Station and may, subject to subsection (5), be detained there for such period as is [877] authorised under section 4 of the Act of 1984, and

(b) shall, subject to this section, be dealt with as though he or she had been detained under that section.

(4) Sections 4(4), (5), (5A) and 10 of the Act of 1984 shall not apply to a person arrested and detained under this section.

(5) If at any time during the detention of a person under this section there are no longer reasonable grounds for–

(a) suspecting that the person has committed the offence in respect of which he or she was arrested under this section, or

(b) believing that his or her detention is necessary for the proper investigation of that offence,

the detention shall be terminated forthwith.

(6) On termination of the detention in accordance with subsection (5) or by reason of the expiry of the period referred to in subsection (3)(a), the member of the Garda Síochána in charge of the Garda Station where the person is detained shall transfer him or her, or cause him or her to be transferred, forthwith back into the custody of the governor of the prison where the person was imprisoned at the time of the arrest.

(7) This section shall not prejudice any power conferred by law apart from this section in relation to the arrest, detention or transfer of prisoners.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments reported.

Bill reported with amendment and received for final consideration.

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

Mr. O'Donoghue: This is historic legislation. It will be invaluable in the fight against drugs for many years to come. It is radical, innovative legislation appropriate to the new millennium. It removes old and tired procedures from the Statute Book and introduces innovative changes to our criminal procedures. It introduces mandatory sentencing in respect of serious drug trafficking and, to that extent, it will be a valuable tool to the law enforcement agencies.

I thank the Opposition spokespersons, Deputy Jim Higgins of the main Opposition party and Deputy Howlin of the Labour Party, for their constructive and at times robust contributions. No doubt a great deal of deliberation and consideration was given to the various amendments tabled.

Deputy Howlin comes late to the legislation and, therefore, he did not see any amendments [878] being accepted today. I assure him, despite any impression he may have to the contrary, that I am disposed towards accepting Opposition amendments and have done so in the past.

I pay tribute to the contribution to the Bill made by the late Deputy Upton. He tabled many outstanding amendments and made a telling contribution. His contribution is very much alive in the body of this legislation.

I thank the officials in my Department who work extremely hard and, like me, often must suffer criticism just because we are in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

I thank you, Acting Chairman, and all of the chairpersons throughout the debates, the staff of the House and the media for the coverage which they have given this worthy legislation.

Mr. Higgins: (Mayo): I enjoyed the debate. I did not regard it as tortuous. There was one day for Second Stage, two days for Committee Stage and one day for Report Stage. The blame for it taking from 1997 until 1999 does not rest with the Opposition. I appreciate that at a certain stage the Minister had to put on the brakes in respect of enhancing the Bill by introducing much needed sections dealing with the area of witness protection in the wake of the tragic death of Garda Jerry McCabe and the almost equally tragic fallout from his court case when the plea had to be reduced from capital murder to manslaughter. The enhancement of the witness protection programme is something to which we all subscribe. I greatly welcome the Minister's introduction of the live television link for witnesses who are in fear of being subject to intimidation.

Our objections and reservations on the other elements of the Bill have been well put in the House. Essentially, they revolve around the impossibility of determining the market value of drugs – the £10,000 issue; the mandatory minimum sentencing; preliminary hearings; and diluting to some extent a vital element of the guilty plea procedure.

I thank everybody involved. I pay tribute to the Minister and his officials. Unfortunately he was not receptive to many of the arguments put forward but he listened to what we had to say. Last, but by no means least, I thank the officials of the House. The future of this Bill will remain open to question and possibly challenge in the courts.

Mr. Howlin: I am glad I came late to this Bill. I think I got the better part of it. The amendments the Minister introduced on Report Stage to safeguard witnesses, combat intimidation, protect jurors, allow for taped evidence and the use of a television link for the giving of evidence from persons not directly in the court improved the Bill. All of these things are good and I welcome them. We look forward to the provision of resources and the practical implementation of them on a countrywide basis not merely on the basis of the two courts which currently have such facilities in the metropolitan area in Dublin.

[879] With regard to the parts of the Bill with which I disagreed, that is why I said I am glad I came late to the Bill because I would have had more to disagree with on Second and Committee Stages than I did on Report Stage. I argued that there are major flaws in the Bill. The provision of mandatory sentencing is wrong in this matter. I argued that it will present difficulties for law officers whose judgment on the value of drugs seized will be extremely onerous as the sentence will hang on this judgment. It could make a significant difference. That valuation will be a crucial part of a case and I counsel the Minister that it will be tested in the courts. Ultimately we will see how fair is the Minister's commitment.

I do not doubt the Minister's commitment. He is well motivated to put on the Statute Book a Bill of substance which he feels is the best answer to the scourge of serious drug abuse which unfortunately is prevalent not only in this city but in communities up and down the country. I cannot fault him for that. He is convinced the measure he steered through the House over a long period will be an effective answer. I hope he is right ultimately. I have not changed my view but, since we are at the conclusion of the debate, I hope his objective will prove to be achieved by it.

I commend the Minister's officials. Officials in every Department have a job to do. More often than not, they would like to be given the right to speak here on occasion. No doubt they would have something interesting to say. As a former colleague of mine used say, anybody can have that – all you need is 8,500 votes to put that right.

I believe in the processing of legislation. I like committee work and I like debate. I particularly like receptive Ministers who are open to persuasion. It annoys and irritates me when somebody comes in with a prepared answer and is inflexible. On this occasion I accept that the Minister said he is flexible. I look forward to the occasion, in the 31 Bills promised by his Department, when I can put that commitment to the test. I and everybody in this House wishes the objective of this Bill – the defeat of the gangsters who prey on people by pushing drugs – God's speed and great success.

Question put and agreed to.

Sitting suspended at 6.51 p.m. and resumed at 7 p.m.

Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.”[880]

Mr. Broughan: I commend Deputies Kenny and Gay Mitchell on moving this very timely legislation. It is very urgent, given the event which triggered its introduction and to which the two Deputies responded. Given the history of section 10 of the Radio and Television Act, 1988, and the Supreme Court judgment, it was imperative that that section be amended. While we may make some further comments on Committee Stage, the Labour Party commends the general drift of this brief but important Bill and we urge the Minister, Deputy de Valera, to accept it.

The basic purpose of the offending advertisement was to boost the circulation of The Irish Catholic. It is a commercial enterprise which plays a very important role in the Irish media. I do not always agree with the opinions of its strong-minded editor, Mr. Quinn, but he expresses his viewpoints very well.

There is no question that the Independent Radio and Television Commission's interpretation of the 1988 legislation was over-rigorous. Anyone who finds a religious or political advertisement offensive has always had recourse, as Deputy O'Shea said last night, to the Garda and the DPP under the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act. However, this over-reaction by the Independent Radio and Television Commission leaves us with no recourse but to ask the Minister to support this Bill and to ensure a similar situation does not recur.

It cannot be argued that anyone could find the advertisement offensive. It is, perhaps, having a go at other media, such as the tabloid press, but there is no justification for the simple refusal to allow it to be broadcast on Waterford local radio and Highland Radio.

The Labour Party will never be comfortable with the idea of censorship and we have opposed it at every turn. Blatant censorship of sections of the media – radio and the written media in this case – is a major move against pluralism and the development of a pluralist society. It is essential, in the interests of that pluralist society, that we allow every institution and sector of society to have its voice heard, provided its message is not offensive or damaging to people. In the run up to the last hotly contested general election two years ago, there were allegations that offensive material was circulating in various constituencies with racist overtones and attacking the travelling community. Every Member of this House would deplore that and would say it should not be tolerated. However, there is existing legislation which can deal with that kind of damaging advertising which could cause violence and trouble in our society.

We must pay tribute tonight to the valuable role of local radio in our society over the past eight or ten years. We Dublin Deputies sometimes feel envious of our colleagues around the country, in that they often have access to very competent and competitive local radio stations and the full range of local media, whereas we [881] must try to get a local message across in the national media. However, many Dublin Deputies are very proud of the role played by radio stations such as 98FM and 104FM and we are looking forward to the proposals which the Minister may sanction through the Independent Radio and Television Commission to give us an extra four or five local stations. I have heard that a senior political figure in the other House might have an interest in developing one of those stations at a later stage. There is very intense interest in Dublin, as in every area of the country, in Irish music. Local radio has played a vital role and the event which triggered this debate should not be allowed impede its development and progress.

Last night my colleague referred to the fact that our colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, was the previous Minister and, as an important aspect of his drive to create the most highly informed civil society, he wished to introduce legislation strengthening the plurality of all types of media. I ask the Minister to look at that area. We are increasingly faced with a situation where the media particularly the print media, are concentrated in far too few hands. We must maintain a situation where the greatest possible plurality of views can be presented because that is the best safeguard for a developed and modern society. Developments which have taken place in the United States and in many of our EU partner countries echo the need to try to create the most pluralist media we can.

I commend the movers of the Bill who have brought it forward at a very timely moment. Aspects of it such as the reference to bona fide publications and the need to ensure it is not directed purely towards sectarian or political ends, might be teased out on Committee Stage. However, we should commend the central idea of the legislation to the Minister and ask her to examine the situation so that radio stations, such as Highland Radio and Waterford Local Radio, are not censored and an important part of the Irish media, such as The Irish Catholic, can get its message across. I commend the Bill.

Mr. O'Flynn: I wish to share my time with Deputies Hanafin, Michael Moynihan and Eoin Ryan.

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

Mr. O'Flynn: I support the Minister's opposition to this Bill. There does not seem to have been much thought put into it or research done on it. The approach of Deputies Kenny and Deputy Gay Mitchell is reminiscent of the approach of the Labour Party in 1998 when it introduced the Broadcasting and other Media (Public Right of Access and Diversity of Ownership) Bill. This Bill has some merit but [882] more investigation needs to be done into the problem it attempts to address.

Section 10(3) of the Radio and Television Act, 1988, provides that no advertisement shall be broadcast which is directed towards any religious or political end or which has any relation to an industrial dispute. This provision is in line with section 20(4) of the Broadcasting Authority Act, 1960. This prohibition has been in force for almost 40 years. I agree that it may need to be revisited and the Minister indicated last night that it could be revisited in the new Broadcasting Bill she will bring before the Dáil in the coming weeks.

Today's society is more sophisticated and critical of what it sees, hears and reads in the media. We no longer accept the written word as gospel. We see television reports of events at home and abroad but we do not accept them at face value. We are quick to look for any major political slant in media coverage. In my parents' time there was a newspaper with the slogan, “the truth in the news”. This assertion was accepted unquestionably by those who read it. What was printed in that newspaper was dogma. Today's readers and journalists are a different breed who merit the description of investigative bodies. They want to know the facts and accept nothing at face value.

In 1997 much publicity surrounded the decision by the Independent Radio and Television Commission to instruct a local radio station to discontinue its advertisement of a video with religious connotations. This decision became the subject of legal action. The sitting High Court judge ruled that the Independent Radio and Television Commission action was legitimate and that it did not, as contended, constitute discrimination on the grounds of religious belief. It was not unconstitutional. The judgment was appealed to the Supreme Court in May 1998 which upheld the previous ruling and further ruled that the alleged limitations and constitutional rights were of a minimal nature.

We are now being asked by Deputies to amend legislation which has received the seal of approval of both the High Court in 1997 and the Supreme Court in May 1998. The sensitivity of the issues involved was acknowledged in both courts. To confer on the Independent Radio and Television Commission the right to make decisions on the religious context of advertisements would be unfair to the Independent Radio and Television Commission and unjust to other parties.

The Minister has stressed that she is not critical of the stand taken by the Independent Radio and Television Commission on the advertisement which was the subject of legal action. Under current legislation, there was no option but to follow the course laid down in law. The Minister stated there may be grounds on which a more selective ban might be developed but she also makes the point that in doing so we might be accused by some of curtailing free speech.

[883] It will be extremely difficult to come up with an agreed mechanism to regulate religious advertising. This difficulty is compounded by the fact that we are promoting matters on which certain people hold sincere views. There are now standards by which the truth of what is said or its suitability for broadcasting can be measured. There is a strong possibility that the religious opinions of the different bodies will cause offence to those who do not subscribe to the viewpoint being promoted.

A fear has been expressed that it would be easy for rich men or bodies to tie up the advertising airwaves through their limitless funding.

Mrs. Barnes: And women as well.

Mr. O'Flynn: The poorer religious bodies would then find themselves without recourse to the same outlets. It could then be justifiably argued that it was a breach of our Constitution.

There are those who believe that the most sensible approach would be to remove the ban entirely. If this was done, it could create its own set of problems. Some people want to expose themselves or their families to the views of other religions or cults. They could claim the removal of the ban would be a major infringement on their constitutional right to exercise their religious beliefs in the privacy of their homes. These problems will not go away. The only sensible solution is methodical and in-depth consultation with the churches, the Independent Radio and Television Commission, the media broadcasters and the public. This may be a slow process but it would guarantee an agreed and considered input from all concerned parties.

I support the Minister's stance. I hope she takes my points on board when she introduces the Broadcasting Bill in the near future.

Ms Hanafin: The right to communicate and freely express convictions and opinions and the free profession and practice of religion as well as freedom of conscience are guaranteed in our Constitution. There is also a ban on discrimination on the basis of religion and the profession of beliefs or status. One would have thought that the mature society in which we live would be able to accept the differences of colour, creed and political persuasion and that people would be able to realise that not all messages broadcast refer to us individually at all times and appreciate that we have a diverse but equal society.

In our legislation we must realise that people, particularly our educated population, are not easily influenced nor do they easily take offence. The finding by Mr. Justice Geoghegan that the ban on religious advertising was constitutional, which was upheld in May 1998, does not take due regard of our educated population.

In stressing that three types of advertisements are banned, advertising directed towards any religious or political end or which has any relation [884] to an industrial dispute, we are removing three elements of life which are at the core of our society. This means that if I want to advertise a pilgrimage in honour of Padre Pio to Holy Cross, I cannot do so but I can pay for an advertisement to warn people about traffic on all roads to Holy Cross because of a religious function. If the Church of Ireland wants to advertise tomorrow that the Archbishop will be opening a new Church of Ireland school and hall in Dalkey, it cannot do so but it can pay for an advertisement which states that it regrets the Archbishop will not be available because he will be opening a school and hall in Dalkey.

The decision not to allow the advertising of a bona fide newspaper, such as The Irish Catholic, presumes in this legislative context that the people are not able to decide for themselves what is or is not bona fide. As regards advertisements designed for a political end, we cannot pay for an advertisement to ask people to vote for Fianna Fáil. We must, therefore, avail of the free party political broadcast RTE gives us. The Labour Party cannot pay for an advertisement to promote its members, for example, so it sends Deputy Rabbitte to take part in every programme from “Morning Ireland” to “Don't Feed the Gondolas”. That you cannot pay to give any information about an industrial dispute or any side of it, it must be in relation to it, means you cannot advertise to inform the public of a serious delay in the airport and all roads leading to it because of a baggage handlers' dispute, not taking one side or the other. The result is chaos on the roads and at the airports.

The Supreme Court said this decision relates to issues which were divisive in our past. Are we going to bound by our past? We learn from our past but we should not be tied into our past. It mentioned specifically that religion was divisive in Northern Ireland. It was and it is. We have come a long way, particularly with the Good Friday Agreement, since making it a purely divisive issue. It also said the Oireachtas was entitled to take the view that such citizens would resent advertising touching on these topics and that it might lead to unrest. The Supreme Court decided what view we might have taken. Perhaps it is time for us to take a different view and to clarify what our view is. An advertisement for a bona fide paper, political party or trade dispute would be much less offensive than some of the advertisements which are currently being broadcast. A radio station which is banned from broadcasting certain advertisements is broadcasting an advertisement both on radio and in picture form which sickens me, that is the can of live worms, every time I pass it. An advertisement which is particularly offensive to women is broadcast on radio and is allowed. It shows a man approaching a woman who says “nice breasts”; she takes offence and he says “I am talking about your chicken fillets”. I also wonder about the value of Claudia Schiffer without her clothes advertising the Citroen Saxo. I should add that when discussing [885] this with my colleagues a few moments ago they could all remember the model but not the car. Perhaps it was having the correct end. Those types of advertisements are offensive but are not banned. Some of the more recent decisions should be reviewed in light of those types of advertisements. What it means, in reality, is that if you cannot place an advertisement to give a factual position you are bound by the opinion or the goodwill of broadcasters. We have seen over a long number of years that popular national and local broadcasters are moulding public opinion. I am not convinced it should be left to them and perhaps advertising religious events, political parties or giving details of an industrial dispute should be allowed so that people can make up their own minds.

The Supreme Court said it might lead to unrest. Does it think the public will take to the streets because one political party says “vote for me” over another or that a riot will break out because the advertisement says an event is taking place.

I commend Deputies Gay Mitchell and Kenny for raising this issue in their Bill ach creidim go láidir go mbaineann na nithe sin chomh maith le RTE, TV3, TnaG, RnaG, is a mbaineann siad leis an Independent Radio and Television Commission agus go bhfuil i bhfad níos mó i gceist. Tá fhios agam gur éirigh sé ón gcosc a cuireadh ar an bhfógra le haghaidh an Irish Catholic. The Minister has said she might review it in the context of the Broadcasting Bill which will cover everything. There are difficulties.

Having said we are an educated and discerning population, I for one would not like to see advertising of sects and cults. As legislators we should accept not the view of the Supreme Court but our own view that the public is discerning. We do not have to watch the advertisements for dog food if it does not concern us. I do not look at advertisements for hair restorer, it does not concern me. I listen but I do not hear. However, advertisements concerning religion, politics, political parties and industrial disputes can be broadcast in a sensitive, legal and non-offensive manner. I hope the Minister will take on board the issues raised when she introduces her broadcasting Bill. I appreciate she cannot accept the Bill because it is narrow in its focus.

Mr. M. Moynihan: I commend Deputies Kenny and Gay Mitchell on introducing the Bill which is a direct result of what happened with The Irish Catholic and Waterford local radio. A few people have voiced their concerns to me at constituency level. They considered it was a deplorable state of affairs that an Act of the Oireachtas banned The Irish Catholic from placing a certain advertisement. That Act provides that no advertisement shall be broadcast which is directed towards any religious or political end. While I can understand why it was banned, we have to explore ways which would give greater freedom. We cannot preside over a society [886] that closes people's minds and whatever legislators may regard as unsuitable.

The proposals in the Bill would place the Independent Radio and Television Commission, as the governing body, in the difficult position of having to distinguish between publications of whatever creed or religion in coming to a decision on whether a particular publication is a bona fide political or religious journal. It would have to evaluate the goals and beliefs of the particular organisation or publication. Most people hold dearly political and religious beliefs. These beliefs are personal but cannot be proved on paper. The Independent Radio and Television Commission would become more than a broadcasting authority, it would become a moral judgmental bureaucracy. That is an aspect of the Bill about which I would be concerned. The Minister is also concerned that it would cause problems for the Independent Radio and Television Commission.

An aspect of the Bill with which I would have a difficulty is whether it is legitimate to consider whether a more selective ban on advertising directed towards religious ends might be developed. For the ban to be selective, any system which assesses the suitability of advertisements would have to be applied within the limits of the Constitution and in a constitutional manner. At the very least the rights contained in Article 42 of the Constitution would have to be respected and fair proceedings for those aggrieved would have to be provided. In other words, there would have to be a mechanism outside of a broadcasting authority to evaluate objections.

A comment was made to me when this matter came to the fore by the religious ministers of one church. It would be unfair to mention any particular religious grouping or organisation because of the newspaper which experienced difficulty. They were angry that because of an Act of the Oireachtas in 1988, their organisation was not getting fair play. I could have said that the organisation to which I belong was not getting fair play and that it too is outlawed. We can never go back to a situation where one religion has complete control. In the last couple of hundred years one religious organisation had complete dominance and control over the State. A similar situation almost arose when another religion became dominant.

The Minister said she will consider the matter and perhaps introduce an amendment on Committee Stage of the Broadcasting Bill to cover the points raised by Deputies Kenny and Mitchell. However, we can ensure there is fair play and balance for everybody. I wish the Minister well in her deliberations.

Mr. E. Ryan: I congratulate the Fine Gael Party on introducing the Bill. Everybody was amazed by the ban on the advertisement for The Irish Catholic and fascinated by the reason for it. However, there was more to it than appeared to be the case at first glance. While [887] I accept the policy and principle involved, the Minister and others outlined where the problems lie in progressing this complicated matter.

As previous speakers mentioned, a number of forms of advertisements are banned. These include advertisements directed towards religious or political ends and those which relate to an industrial dispute. I strongly support the ban on advertisements directed towards political ends because political parties have enough problems raising funds without individuals constantly placing advertisements. This happens in the United States where a huge amount of money is spent in this area. Such a development in Ireland would create another huge problem for the political system. In addition, industrial disputes can be sensitive at certain times.

The proposals with regard to how religious issues could be handled would leave the Independent Radio and Television Commission with a difficult problem in terms of deciding what safeguards should be included and who should be considered under the heading of religion. Obviously, the main churches would come under the heading, but what would be the position regarding cults and sects who might want to place advertisements? People might say they should not be allowed to advertise and disagreements could arise. The Church of Scientology appears to raise the hackles of many people who are concerned about it. However, undoubtedly, the Church of Scientology feels it has something to say and that people could lead a better and more fulfilling life if they followed its teachings. The proposals involve many difficult issues and would leave the Independent Radio and Television Commission in the difficult position of trying to decide how to regulate this area in terms of who should and should not be allowed to place advertisements.

The best example of how to get around this problem is the method used by some of the more extreme American Christian churches in Latin America to convince people to join. They give people free radios, but they are jammed into the church's station. People can turn on the radio but they can listen to only the church's propaganda. This causes many problems in poorer areas of Latin America, but it is one way of getting around the problem.

The Minister said the Independent Radio and Television Commission would have to consider whether a particular religious journal or newspaper is bona fide and, where it decides a publication is bona fide, whether the advertisement promotes the publication and is not sectarian or directed towards a political end. This would lead to many difficulties.

However, I agree the ban on the advertisement for The Irish Catholic appeared extraordinary. I am delighted the Minister will consider the principles of the Bill and, hopefully, bring forward an amendment which will allow people to advertise. [888] This might include the Church of Scientology, about which I do not know much, the Catholic Church or the Church of Ireland. It is important to consider the Bill and to ensure all possible measures are taken. People are concerned that individuals cannot place advertisements if they wish.

Deputy Hanafin stated that one cannot place an advertisement which people will knock, but one can tell people there will be difficulties along the road. This is ludicrous, although it is a way around the problem. As legislators we should try to find a better way to do our business so people can inform others about what they are doing and about functions that are being held.

I congratulate the Fine Gael Party on raising this matter. It is an interesting area and the more one reads about it, the more complicated it becomes in terms of solving the problems The Irish Catholic faced. I congratulate the Fine Gael Party and I urge the Minister to consider the matter. She has given a commitment that she will examine the issue with a view to introducing an amendment on Committee Stage of the Broadcasting Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I understand Deputy Barnes wishes to share her time with Deputies Browne, Ring, Boylan, Carey and Perry. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mrs. Barnes: I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for saving me the trouble of repeating the list of names.

In common with other Members, I find it a strange irony, in view of the sense of censorship we experienced and perhaps struggled against in the past, particularly with regard to the Constitution and the Catholic Church, and the censorship of other publications, that this matter has arisen because an advertisement for The Irish Catholic was banned. Who among us ever thought such an interpretation would be placed on it?

I also commend Deputies Kenny and Gay Mitchell on raising this issue. Perhaps the debate is a prelude to the type of discussion which will take place on the Broadcasting Bill when it is introduced. It is interesting that this issue has been raised in the context of an almost archaic interpretation by the Independent Radio and Television Commission with regard to an advertisement. However, perhaps the fact that it related to The Irish Catholic galvanised all Members into recognising how outdated and inflexible the legislation appears to be. It may also have reminded us how far we have moved on with regard to some of the fears expressed in the judgments of the High and Supreme Courts. Although the judgments are recent, in common with other Members, I feel they relate to a time far back in history.

As Deputies Kenny and Mitchell and the Minister, Deputy de Valera, said, we are confronted with huge contradictions in dealing with this mat[889] ter. I hoped this amendment would be taken on board to test how effective it might have been for the Independent Radio and Television Commission, as we do with other codes, such as ASSI for standards in advertising and the censorship boards. It is not the only agency in the State asked to make a judgment. We rely on other State agencies to do that.

Deputy Hanafin recognised the excesses of some of the advertising which is permitted. The Minister, Deputy de Valera and I, during our period on women's rights committees, worked out a strong code for the ASSI on the exploitation of women and the explicitly sexual or commercial use of women and children. We have worked these issues out with State agencies, allowing them to make judgments, and that system has worked well. While there might be certain difficulties for the Independent Radio and Television Commission as outlined by the Minister and other Deputies, at least we could have tried it before the Broadcasting Act is in full operation. In the meantime we are stuck with this inflexibility which has ended up with the Independent Radio and Television Commission having to ban an advertisement for a perfectly acceptable national newspaper.

In looking back on the judgments and interpretations of the Supreme Court and High Court, which led to the Independent Radio and Television Commission feeling it was bound by this interpretation, we can all rejoice that today we would not see advertising at the level of the advertisement of The Irish Catholic being viewed as religious advertising coming from a different church, which could be offensive to many people and open to the interpretation of proselytising. Having heard the excesses of the PTL, praise the Lord channels which broadcast 24 hours a day in the United States, one can see that there can be an excess of proselytising. This amendment would not lend itself to that.

In the High Court judgment, advertisements directed towards any religious or political end, or any industrial dispute, would have to be looked at in the context of the more tolerant, secular society in which we live. That does not mean a lack of spiritual content or a lack of respect for people's religions. The more bitter divisions of civil war politics have been reconciled and we must be careful about rich parties being able to buy advertising. The Supreme Court said that such advertisements, if permitted, might lead to unrest. I hope that is something we will never have to worry about. The judgment went on to state that the Oireachtas may have thought that, in relation to matters of such sensitivity, rich men should not be able to buy access to the airwaves to the detriment of their poorer rivals. I was struck by that because I did not know if it was an acceptance that women would never have enough money to do this or that rich women are able to buy access – positive discrimination.

This amendment could be used positively. We consider how this issue can be resolved in this [890] debate and the forthcoming debate on the broadcasting Bill. As the Minister said, in an era of ever increasing numbers of broadcast services becoming available via satellites, which are outside the legislative regime, the total prohibition on advertising directed towards a religious end is an anachronism. I welcome the Minister's statement that the ban could perhaps be removed. We are like King Canute with the waves coming in over his toes. There is not much point in us trying to have a rigid and inflexible sense of censorship in this State without realising that there are huge tidal waves which will overcome us unless we take this on in the broadcasting Bill.

Mr. Browne: (Carlow-Kilkenny): I am fascinated by the problem which has arisen and many of the speeches which have been made about broadcasting religious programmes. The ban affects the advertising of a newspaper –The Irish Catholic. I do not see how anyone can feel they are being forced to live up to the religious beliefs of the Catholic Church if the paper advertises itself. The Irish Catholic is described as “a lively and provocative family newspaper”–“good reading which is often controversial but never dull”, “a thoroughly good read for all the family”. It could be Our Boys or Bunty. The daily papers can advertise their heavyweight writers looking profound and intelligent and we are expected to buy them. The advertisement says “This is a thoroughly good read, often controversial but never dull”. People are in a knot that this might upset the religious ethos of the State.

In a week when judges have had a bad time, one High Court judge, quoted by the Minister, stated that “Irish people with religious beliefs tend to belong to certain churches and, that being so, religious advertising from a different church can be offensive to many people and might be open to the interpretation of proselytising”. For it to affect people, they would have to buy the paper. It is not a discussion telling people how good the Catholic Church is. It could be the Church of Ireland Gazette which came up with a good slogan. Would that upset me? It would not because I would not buy it unless I wanted it.

I compliment Deputies Kenny and Mitchell on introducing the Bill and I regret the Minister is postponing a decision under the Broadcasting Bill that may be introduced some time in the future. It was never the intention of politicians that one could not advertise a newspaper for fear of being accused of selling one's religious wares. If Fianna Fáil wanted to sell its fantastic newspaper, what difference would it make if it were advertised 150 times? It is only Fianna Fáil people who would want to buy it. The same applies to a Fine Gael paper. If one wants to broadcast programmes, that is a different matter. Many programmes on radio and television have a much greater effect than advertising a newspaper. The whole issue is absurd.

[891]Mr. Ring: I am against censorship but there is a great deal of censorship in this country. RTE has engaged in censorship for the past 20 years. Deputy Donal Carey knows all about censorship. In 1994, when I stood in the by-election, RTE showed, not once but twice, Tommy Gorman interviewing the EU Commissioner. I call the Late Late Show the Fianna Fáil show because almost every week Commissioner Pádraig Flynn, the Minister, Deputys Dempsey, the Taoiseach, Deputy Ahern, or the Deputy from Cork appears on the programme. Over the past two years there has been a Fianna Fáil representative on the Late Late Show almost every week. That is the worst kind of censorship as far as I am concerned. What is wrong with Deputies John Bruton, Dukes, Kenny, Deputy Browne or myself? Do we not have a right to appear on an RTE programme?

Another example of censorship concerns Objective One status, to which the Dublin brigade was totally opposed. Representatives of IBEC and many other organisations went to Brussels to meet Commissioner Wulf-Mathies, but as soon as the Fine Gael delegation arrived, Tommy Gorman could not be found. That is censorship at its best.

I do not read The Irish Catholic or Our Boys– I used to read The Beano when I was young – but I do not approve of censorship. The greatest development in this country was local radio which took on RTE and the newspapers. Local radio gives us all a voice. If people have something to say, they will be given an opportunity to say it on local radio and they do not have to be a member of Fianna Fáil. They can support Fine Gael, Labour or just be an ordinary Joe soap. Local radio is not censored. RTE has got away with censorship for the past 20 years. That is a disgrace. There is the hand of some political party in that practice. That type of censorship should be eliminated from the media.

I do not support censorship of any kind. If people pay to advertise in the national or local papers or in other media, they should be allowed to do so. There is too much censorship in this country. People cannot use the word “black” now because it is seen as a form of discrimination. If one categorises people who live in halting sites, one could end up in court. It is time people were allowed to say what they want and if others want to object, let them do so. That would be better than the one-sided argument we constantly hear on the airwaves. RTE has got away with that, but the Minister does not charge Fianna Fáil people an additional £10 for the licence fee. We have all to pay the same fees. People in Fine Gael, Labour or Sinn Féin are not given a reduction. We should all have equal right of access to the national media and it is time the censorship came to an end.

When we get back into Government we will have to address the problem of censorship. Over the past number of years various leaders of Fine Gael were reluctant to deal with it in case it upset those in the media. I am not afraid of RTE or [892] TnaG. I will say what I believe. For the past 20 years RTE has not allowed free speech, but it has allowed the voices of those in certain political parties to be heard. I will never forgive RTE for broadcasting the debate on the EU Commissioner three weeks before the election and repeating it a week before the by-election in case anybody missed it. Thankfully, the people were intelligent enough to vote for me.

Mr. Boylan: I support the Bill brought forward by Deputy Kenny and his colleague. Our vision in 1988 was narrow and it is understandable that this type of legislation would have been passed. We have moved on since then and, while we cherish freedom of religious expression in our Constitution, people in the Church tended to keep to themselves. They have been responsible for the slow movement that has taken place in that regard. We have moved forward, however, because the clergy and the people can often be seen mingling at various functions. That did not happen ten years ago.

The decision handed down by the High Court judge shows how far removed the Judiciary is from reality. They have not moved forward with people in the Church. They should mingle with the people to understand the way they think. For that reason it is important we update this legislation which was brought about by a ban on The Irish Catholic. It is difficult to believe that has taken place. Neither I nor people of any denomination would object to that publication.

Local radio is playing an important part in the lives of people, particularly in the Border area I represent, where we must show tolerance in the expression of our faith. The advertising of Church functions should be allowed on local radio. From my reading of the current legislation, that type of advertising would be banned. That is wrong. We are not moving with the people. In the past I have told those in the Church they were removed from the people and that they were fortunate they did not have to be elected every five years. They got an answer from the people by the fall in the numbers attending their churches. For that reason the legislation was changed.

I agree with all the comments made by Deputy Ring. That is another aspect of censorship. One episode RTE will not re-run is the recent interview with Pádraig Flynn on the Late Late Show. We all make mistakes in life; some make bigger ones than others. Hopefully, we can all learn from them.

Mr. D. Carey: I support the amending legislation. I am disappointed my constituency colleague will not accede to minor legislation that would come into effect immediately . The Minister is denying The Irish Catholic an opportunity to publish these advertisements on a weekly basis throughout the summer. The periodicals market is dominated by Tony O'Reilly and the Irish Independent . Effectively, they have cornered the entire market. The Irish Catholic is an indepen[893] dent paper. Is that the reason the Minister is waiting for the Broadcasting Bill to be published? We have been waiting on that Bill for the past two years. If there is another Hillsborough agreement next week there will be some other change to it. The Minister and the Minister of State know the number of questions asked of the Taoiseach during the Order of Business about delays in various legislation. A new agreement in Northern Ireland may impinge on broadcasting and will mean that the Minister's Bill will be put back even further. It is niggardly of the Minister not to accept this Bill in good faith. No one is losing as a result of this Bill.

One national periodical has been mentioned which does not make a profit and has a limited market. The religious content of my local radio station is provided by two volunteer priests, one of whom presents a good old time music programme. He has a positive effect and that is a public service. Are High Court judges in the Pale so unaware that rural Ireland is still interested in the Catholic Church and wants to buy this newspaper that they have effectively banned it?

I agree with Deputy Browne that the so-called learned judge's interpretation in this case is appalling. The Minister, the Minister of State and their two officials are opposing this Bill and waiting for the Broadcasting Bill. That is not worthy of the Minister.

Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Miss de Valera): It is not appropriate for the Deputy to mention officials.

An Ceann Comhairle: It is not in order to do so.

Mr. D. Carey: What did I say? Did the Minister raise a point of order or did she pass an off-hand remark? What was the purpose of her intervention?

An Ceann Comhairle: I have just taken the Chair. Officials should not be criticised in the House.

Mr. D. Carey: I know the officials and I am surprised that they support this line. There is nothing wrong with saying that.

Mr. Perry: I compliment Deputies Kenny and Gay Mitchell on introducing legislation to amend the Radio and Television Act, 1988, to ensure that the legitimate advertisement of bona fide journals and newspapers is not prohibited by law. It is necessary that this happens urgently.

Subsection 1(3A)(a) stipulates that the journal or newspaper must be a bona fide publication. Subsection 1(3B)(b) states that the nature of the advertisement must be directed to the promotion of the journal or newspaper, and not sectarian or directed towards a political end.

The Independent Radio and Television Commission's decision to ban The Irish Catholic from [894] advertising on local radio is astonishing. The ban has been imposed under section 10(3) of the Radio and Television Act, 1988, which surprised me when it was introduced. That section states that “No advertisement shall be broadcast which is directed towards any religious or political end or which has any relation to an industrial dispute”.

It is incredible that a reputable newspaper seeking to increase its circulation should be prevented from doing so by the Independent Radio and Television Commission's wide interpretation of this section of the Act. Many secular publications have political views and agendas but are not prevented from advertising. The Irish Catholic treats important issues of morality and public concern in an intelligent, unsensational manner and provides a forum for a lively exchange of views. Its philosophy is ecumenical and unbiased. It is vital that this section of the Radio and Television Act is amended.

The Minister stated that it would be difficult to regulate religious advertising in the same way as advertisements for goods and service are regulated. How does one determine if an advertisement directed towards a religious end is truthful? This is an important point but surely the consumer is the best judge. I am not sure if this is a breach of EU trade directives. How truthful is the print media? The tabloid press often include stories which are sensationalist, untruthful and unjust. The editorial content of such newspapers is open to question.

A segment of the market is prevented from advertising. We operate a sponsored programme on local radio which is very effective. The ban also covers political parties and Members cannot advertise clinics on local radio. New regulations have been introduced regarding election expenditure. In the run up to the local elections, the local press will gain much revenue from all political parties. New regulations govern the election expenditure of Deputies and the declaration of expenses by councillors. People should be allowed to use whichever medium they wish – local radio or local press. Many people listen to local radio and do not buy the local press. It is unfair that radio stations are prevented from competing with the print media.

The legislation which prevents The Irish Catholic from advertising also prevents the advertising of fund-raising activities. Deputy Kenny correctly stated that fund-raising for charitable events is a bona fide business – there is nothing untruthful about it.

The 1988 Act needs to be examined. The Minister should accept this Bill. She has indicated that she will look at this issue in the forthcoming Broadcasting Bill. I was not aware that the prohibition on advertising existed. Several of the regulations governing local radio are discriminatory as against the print media.

[895]Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Éamon Ó Cuív): I have listened with interest to the contributions in this debate. We all recognise that there are issues to be addressed. It is good that we have addressed these issues and the views expressed have been interesting. No one would see any harm in The Irish Catholic's advertisement. However, one has to look at this issue in a broader context. One cannot have selective bans – one has a ban or one does not. There is a ban on religious and political advertising and advertising referring to industrial disputes.

I am thankful there is a ban on political advertising as it is one less pressure on political representatives. We all hold clinics and constituents would demand that we advertised them on radio as well as in the papers. I pay enough in newspaper advertising without having to add local radio advertising to my bill. Newspaper advertising is probably one of the biggest expenditures I have in my constituency and I imagine the same applies to other TDs. We should not rush to judgment on that in our own interest and in the interest of fairness.

If we consider the context of the religious situation, we should pause for thought. The airwaves should certainly be made available for religious programmes and for political discussion and debate. However, the day we go the American route in regard to religious or political programming or advertising will be a sad one. I know that is not the Deputy's intention but like many things which start innocently, pressure could be exerted. Someone might break out of the fold and there would be no holding back. In trying to deal with what is a complex issue, we must ensure we do not make the end result worse than what prevails at present.

The Minister has undertaken to look at this issue in the context of the Broadcasting Bill. I do not blame the Opposition for wanting an instant solution tonight or thinking they have found one. The more one considers this issue, the more one must recognise the complex issues involved. We can assure the House that the broadcasting legislation is on the way very soon.

Mr. Kenny: Tá sé ag teacht.

Éamon Ó Cuív: Tá sé agus tiocfaidh sé níos tapúla ná mar a cheap daoine. Beidh mise agus an tAire níos mó ná sásta go dtabharfar breithiúnas orainn nuair a bheidh an Bille á phlé. The Minister's undertaking to look at this issue is a reasonable manner in which to proceed. It recognises the validity of the motion and the issue and the importance of this discussion but it also gives time and space to obtain expert advice on the legal ramifications of any proposed changes.

As I understand it, the issue in this case was that a publication rather than a religious fact was being advertised and that comes under the terms of the ban.

[896]Mr. Browne: (Carlow-Kilkenny): It has to do with interpretation.

Éamon Ó Cuív: Can one separate those issues in a non-discriminatory fashion?

Mrs. Barnes: The ASAI does that all the time.

Miss de Valera: Not for religious and political purposes.

Éamon Ó Cuív: If one separated the issues, would one merely shift the goalposts? The Minister has stated that she will consider all of the complexities involved in this issue.

There is much merit in old sayings. In the Gaeltacht, in particular, many older people make very valid points by way of old sayings we sometimes tend to ignore. “Marry in haste and repent at leisure” is one such saying. If we were to rush to judgment on this issue, it would be a classic case of marrying in haste without having teased out the various issues involved.

The debate has been a very useful and stimulating one. Contributions from all sides of the House were, for the most part, very positive. I congratulate the Opposition for bringing this issue to the floor of the House where matters of national importance should be discussed and where we, as legislators, should thrash them out. Too often, we do this on radio programmes and through other fora, everywhere except on the floor of this House.

Is dóigh liom gur díospóireacht mhaith a bhí againn anocht. Iarraim ar an bhFreasúra fanacht leis an mBille maidir le cúrsaí craolacháin agus deis a thabhairt don Aire machnamh ar an gceist seo ionas gur féidir léi teacht chun moladh foirfea air.

Mr. Naughten: I wish to share time with Deputy Enda Kenny.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Naughten: I congratulate Deputies Kenny and Mitchell for introducing this Bill. We have no role models in modern society. Our politicians and clergy have been disgraced and even members of the Judiciary have muddied the waters. People have nowhere to turn. While religion has gone out of fashion to a certain extent, many people are starting to reconsider its benefits. Religion encourages people to take time out from their busy lifestyles to think about their direction in life. This is a good thing, whether encouraged by religion or some other factor. It is crucially important that young people learn to do that in our fast moving society.

Many people do not even know their next door neighbours nowadays and do not even care who they are. We should not accept that and should seek to ensure that such a trend does not continue to develop. It was never part of our culture and should not form part of it in the future. The Irish Catholic has promoted this type of contem[897] plation. That has been good for society, yet the magazine cannot be promoted on radio although we regularly hear promotions for Magill and The Phoenix which contain political information.

We are living in a pluralist society and should be looking to the future. Religion may have been threatening in the past because many people used it as a vehicle for the advancement of their own motives. Religion in itself was not bad but the manner in which it was used was. That is no reason for preventing the promotion of a publication such as The Irish Catholic.This Bill is a well thought out piece of legislation. It deals specifically with the issue we are debating and is not longwinded. I cannot understand why the Minister cannot accept it as the Independent Radio and Television Commission would still have the power to scrutinise any local or national radio advertising. We talk about censorship in regard to religious or political publications but we have never looked at censorship of the Internet. There are numerous questionable advertisements on both national and local radio and on television stations, yet little seems to be done about them. Deputies Hanafin and Barnes cited examples of some advertising which is derogatory to women. Such advertisements are also derogatory to men. They are using women to target a product at men, as though we are simpletons who will buy a car if we see a naked woman on television standing behind it. That is as degrading to men as it is to women. These are the issues we should examine in the context of censorship, the Independent Radio and Television Commission and advertising standards, instead of banning something like this publication which is good and should be encouraged. It is not promoting any particular point or religious denomination. It is a positive element in society and should be encouraged. The Minister should reconsider her decision and accept this legislation.

Mr. Kenny: I thank the Minister and the Minister of State for attending the debate. I also thank the Deputies from various parties who made contributions on this short amending legislation.

I was more than surprised at the range of issues raised and comments made to me both inside and outside the Chamber on the Bill, some of which were very strongly expressed by Deputies on all sides. The value of this short Bill is that it is a catalyst for triggering a much broader and deeper discussion on the values of Irish society, the way in which public representatives on all sides view the country, the way people react to issues and events and the difference between religion and spirituality in the light of 25 years of change, turmoil and trauma.

The Minister's speech was well written and raises four different issues. First she declared her opposition to the Bill on the basis of the High Court case and the appealed Supreme Court decisions. The Minister quoted extensively the views of both learned gentlemen though, as she [898] points out, the provision in question is almost 40 years old, being contained in the original Act of 1960.

The Minister then referred to the possibility of introducing a selective ban to which the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cuív, is opposed on the basis that there should either be a ban or not. The Minister dealt with whether the Independent Radio and Television Commission would be able to judge particular kinds of advertisements under a selective ban. Obviously, in the case of The Irish Catholic a value judgment had to be given on the kind of advertisement being promoted by the paper. In this context it would have been necessary to take into account the goals of the newspaper and, as a consequence, the goals and aims of the church.

The Minister then suggested that a wiser course might be to give the Independent Radio and Television Commission power to ban particular advertisements of religious material if it considered that an advertisement offended public order or morality rather than possibly discriminating between different publications.

The fourth element of the Minister's contribution was the possibility of removing the ban entirely. The Minister clarified this by saying she thought this might be the safest route to take.

The Minister and a number of Fianna Fáil Deputies referred to the forthcoming broadcasting Bill. This matter has been discussed for ten years and the Minister, Deputy de Valera, has had responsibility for the matter for almost two years. I fully understand the limitations on people in the draftsman's office and appreciate the difficulties the Good Friday Agreement caused in terms of taking the attention of those people away from a range of legislation and thereby moving back its publication. However, if the Minister is convinced that the removal of the prohibition is the way to proceed, there is no reason she cannot say that such provision is included in the Broadcasting Bill, rather than saying that she will seek to amend the Bill on Committee Stage following the careful thought and consideration referred to in her speech. The country is broadminded enough to be able to cater for all of these things.

Deputy Naughten referred to the Internet. It is now possible to use one's PC to tune into voice-overs on 10,000 religious stations and sites all over the world, many of which have very zany ideas. When the Broadcasting Bill is introduced some of what will be available as a result of the digital revolution and when there is vastly increased satellite coverage will be very inappropriate in current circumstances. However, this is what we will be faced with. What will be the position, for example, if a pirate radio station, of which there are currently approximately 50, decides to illegally take an advertisement for The Irish Catholic? Would the Department take action against such a radio station and close it down on the basis that running the advertisement contravened the provisions of the Act?

[899] Last night I presented a number of other examples. Bishop Flynn and Bishop Finnegan in the dioceses of Achonry and Killala normally bring a pilgrimage to Lourdes. Next year, the 2,000th anniversary of the birth of Christ, they might decide to bring a particularly large pilgrimage and subsequently produce a special publication for the start of the new millennium on the pilgrimage and advertise it in The Irish Catholic. However, any advertisement on the local radio stations would be banned. What would be the position if the editor of The Western People, Terry Reilly, said it was including a 50 page spread on the millennium diocesan pilgrimage to Lourdes as a special supplement in the paper? The local radio station could run an advertisement for the edition of The Western People which included the supplement. Another example might be if the Pope decided to come to Ireland at the beginning of the new millennium in respect of the celebration of the 2,000th anniversary of the birth of Christ. The Sunday Independent might decide to carry a 25 page special supplement on the visit. The supplement could not be advertised on local radio but could be advertised in the context of the Sunday Independent. It is ironic that the Irish Press, for which the Minister's grandfather went to the United States to raise money, could be banned by the Independent Radio and Television Commission in terms of it being a political journal or having a political end.

[900]Miss de Valera: The same could perhaps be said of other publications.

Mr. Kenny: Indeed. When section 31 was invoked and Sinn Féin was banned from the airwaves there were quite a number of discussions on RTE radio on articles contained in An Phoblacht, a banned publication which carried the views of the republican IRA etc. In an indirect way this was a method of advertising a political journal which had a deeply divided end from many points of view.

Yesterday I pointed out that there is clearly a difference between religion and spirituality, something referred to by other Deputies, given the materialistic country in which we live. Many people have drifted from their narrow religious confines and are now looking for something different. It would be very appropriate if this legislation was accepted. The Minister could accept it in principle and say she will incorporate it following the period of discussion and thought and taking into account the constitutional issues referred to last night.

I thank the Deputies who contributed to the debate. It provides a mechanism for a much deeper and broader discussion about the type of country we have and the type of people we are. The legislation should be accepted.

Question put.

Tá

Allen, Bernard.
Barnes, Monica.
Barrett, Seán.
Bell, Michael.
Belton, Louis.
Boylan, Andrew.
Bradford, Paul.
Broughan, Thomas.
Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
Bruton, Richard.
Burke, Liam.
Burke, Ulick.
Carey, Donal.
Clune, Deirdre.
Coveney, Simon.
Crawford, Seymour.
Creed, Michael.
Currie, Austin.
D'Arcy, Michael.
Durkan, Bernard.
Enright, Thomas.
Farrelly, John.
Finucane, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Flanagan, Charles.
Gilmore, Éamon.
Gormley, John.
Hayes, Brian.

Higgins, Jim.
Hogan, Philip.
Howlin, Brendan.
Kenny, Enda.
McCormack, Pádraic.
McGahon, Brendan.
McGinley, Dinny.
McGrath, Paul.
Mitchell, Olivia.
Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
Naughten, Denis.
Noonan, Michael.
O'Keeffe, Jim.
O'Shea, Brian.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Owen, Nora.
Penrose, William.
Perry, John.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reynolds, Gerard.
Ring, Michael.
Ryan, Seán.
Sargent, Trevor.
Sheehan, Patrick.
Stagg, Emmet.
Stanton, David.
Timmins, Billy.
Yates, Ivan.

Níl

Ahern, Dermot.
Ahern, Michael.
Ahern, Noel.
Ardagh, Seán.

Aylward, Liam.
Blaney, Harry.
Brady, Johnny. Brady, Martin.[901]

Níl–continued

Brennan, Matt.
Brennan, Séamus.
Browne, John (Wexford).
Byrne, Hugh.
Callely, Ivor.
Carey, Pat.
Collins, Michael.
Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
Coughlan, Mary.
Cowen, Brian.
Cullen, Martin.
Daly, Brendan.
de Valera, Síle.
Dennehy, John.
Doherty, Seán.
Ellis, John.
Fahey, Frank.
Fleming, Seán.
Flood, Chris.
Foley, Denis.
Fox, Mildred.
Hanafin, Mary.
Harney, Mary.
Haughey, Seán.
Healy-Rae, Jackie.
Jacob, Joe.
Keaveney, Cecilia.
Kelleher, Billy.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Killeen, Tony.
Kirk, Séamus.

[902] Kitt, Michael.
Kitt, Tom.
Lawlor, Liam.
Lenihan, Brian.
Lenihan, Conor.
McDaid, James.
McGennis, Marian.
Molloy, Robert.
Moloney, John.
Moynihan, Donal.
Moynihan, Michael.
Ó Cuív, Éamon.
O'Dea, Willie.
O'Donnell, Liz.
O'Donoghue, John.
O'Flynn, Noel.
O'Hanlon, Rory.
O'Keeffe, Batt.
O'Keeffe, Ned.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
O'Malley, Desmond.
Roche, Dick.
Ryan, Eoin.
Smith, Brendan.
Smith, Michael.
Treacy, Noel.
Wade, Eddie.
Wallace, Dan.
Wallace, Mary.
Walsh, Joe.
Wright, G. V.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Barrett and Stagg; Níl, Deputies S. Brennan and Callely.

Question declared lost.

Mr. Kenny: The Corrib system is the most important lake system in Ireland and comprises Loughs Carra, Mask and Corrib. Of the approximately 13 wild brown trout fisheries left internationally this is the most important. Under the tourism angling measure of the last tranche of European funding, moneys were committed for the restoration and redevelopment of this important international fishery, its spawning beds and tributaries.

It is almost a year since I raised this matter and the work carried out to date has been substantial and worthwhile. Fifty kilometres of low quality production waterways for restoration as habitats for trout spawning and nursery productions were put in place, a major scheme of placing stone and timber deflectors in the spawning streams was undertaken, pools with suitable habitats for juvenile and adult trout were constructed, riffle sections with head and tail pools large enough to hold spawning and juvenile trout were created, thousands of tonnes of suitable gravel were placed in selected areas to facilitate more spawning, overhead bank protection was put in place and 54 kilometres of waterway were fenced off to prevent cattle entering the river, trampling the bank and causing serious pollution.

The previous Government allocated £1 million to this under the tourism angling measure. The Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Woods, allocated two subventions of £220,000 and £650,000 for the plan. Last October, the Western Regional Fisheries Board submitted a claim of £1.8 million for expenditure for 1999. No response has been received to date. The international consultant who reported on the validity of the works to date and who reanalysed the cost of finishing the job at about £5 million said it would be pointless wasting money on smaller schemes without completing this major flagship project. He complimented those involved – the Department, the workmen, the fisheries board, etc.

How much money decommitted under the tourism angling measure is available, and can it and other funds be directed towards this project for the remainder of 1999? I understand the new tranche of funds will not become available until 1 January 2000. Those involved in the fishing business expect expenditure of around £5 million over three years, but that is unrealistic. However, it would be realistic over five years.

I would like the Minister and the Minister of State to ensure this project is completed and the great western lakes, the largest freshwater body for wild brown trout in the world, are restored and preserved. The money spent in good faith and the good work carried out should not go to waste. The area has considerable marketing potential internationally. Bord Fáilte, individual operators, hotels and fishing people have a unique and wonderful facility to promote internationally. It affects the region in terms of the improvement of its economy because it is located [903] in the heart of the 13 counties deemed eligible for Objective One status by Europe. It is an important element in creating an initiative for local people, boatmen, gillies, housewives, bed and breakfasts and fishing people, and for the enjoyment of those from home and abroad who avail of this wonderful facility.

Will the Minister of State confirm the Department is serious about completing this major project? Will he outline how much is left of the funds decommitted under the tourism angling measure? Will he indicate if there will be a new revised development plan which will allocate £1 million a year for the next five years from 2000?

Minister of State at the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources (Mr. Byrne): I welcome the opportunity to update the House on the western lakes project and on overall progress under the tourism angling measure to develop the inland fisheries resource.

The western lakes project is one of the flagship projects receiving support under the tourism angling measure. The objective is to restore and develop the prime brown trout fisheries of Loughs Corrib, Mask and Carra, thus attracting more tourist anglers to the western region. The lakes cover a very wide geographical area and this development project has focused on improving components of the Corrib system on an incremental and prioritised basis.

Deputy Kenny asked me if we are serious about this project. We are so serious about it that we have provided funding of £2 million out of £17 million. There are 170 projects on hand. That is a clear indication that we believe it is an area that deserves such funding. It represents 12 per cent of total funding available to tourism angling projects over the entire period of the measure, which is a significant allocation for any single project. I believe the Deputy accepts that.

The House will appreciate that project funding under any operational programme cannot be open ended. The western lakes project is coming to the end of the present development programme for which available funding was approved. This applies equally to a number of other development works under the tourism angling measure and I would like to set present and future funding options in context for the House.

The objective of the tourism angling measure, which is a component of the operational programme for tourism, is to develop the national angling product to best international standards and to significantly increase the number of tourist anglers visiting the country. Angling has particular benefits from the tourism perspective as a year round activity often in non-traditional tourism locations, delivering significant local economic return as well as contributing to the tourism sector overall.

I stress again that the main flagship developments under the measure have been in the west, especially in the western lakes and the Moy [904] development programme. More than £17 million is being invested with significant EU support under the tourism angling measure up to the end of 1999. This is the largest investment ever made in inland fisheries development here. The fundamental criteria are that the fisheries are capable of attracting additional foreign visitors, are readily available for tourist use and demonstrably deliver economic benefit and additional employment in the regions concerned.

More than 170 projects have been approved to date and are already making a significant contribution in terms of enhancing the fisheries resource and adding to year round tourism facilities around the country. This investment of £405,000, is also being supported by a specific marketing initiative this year to promote Irish angling abroad. It is being administered and led by the Central Fisheries Board and Bord Fáilte. The markets initiative involves production of national angling brochures and posters targeted at potential customers, a programme of journalist and trade visits to promote the Irish product and the investigation of new market opportunities, notably in the US and in Scandinavia.

The House will appreciate the need to ensure that the overall benefits of the investment under the tourism angling measure are maximised through well planned and well spread investment throughout the country. The aim is to deliver game, coarse and sea angling projects with a balanced regional spread and a good mix of public, private and community projects.

In addition to the flagship projects, such as the western lakes, we must not overlook the value for money achieved through investment in a wide range of small projects where local fisheries facilities can be upgraded at a comparatively small cost by angling clubs, fisheries owners and local community groups as well as the regional fisheries boards.

The amount of moneys that have been decommitted or that have not been used under the measure are very small, which is a compliment to the western lakes development and others. That money is in a kitty at present and is being considered for the Deputy's project and many others. I compliment the Deputy for raising this matter and for the sincerity with which he presented his case.

Mr. Timmins: We are now well familiar with the images from Kosovo that continually appear on our television screens. We hear spokespersons, NATO and Serb, representing both sides of the argument. Most radio chat shows indulge in a “for the bombing” or “against the bombing” head count. It surprises me how definite most people can be as they express their views.

Only one thing is certain: we will never know what the better course of action might have been. One of the major casualties of any conflict is the truth and from this distance it is difficult to ascer[905] tain what reports, pictures or images are an accurate reflection on what is happening as the propaganda war wins out.

One of the casualties in this conflict is the Kosovo refugees. On 6 April the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs stated:

I have been in contact today with the United Nations High Commission for refugees to discuss how best to assist ethnic Albanian people on the ground and to provide refuge for them in Ireland in accordance with their needs.

The same day a meeting took place in the Department of Foreign Affairs to plan the immediate arrangements for bringing in Kosovan refugees. All the key Departments and bodies concerned with the refugee issue were represented.

At the meeting potential accommodation was identified in a number of areas around the country and other issues, such as health, language and trauma counselling were also explored. In the follow up there was a difference in emphasis from some aid agencies as to whether it would be of more benefit to send aide de camps in the countries surrounding Kosovo as opposed to bringing refugees to Ireland.

We should take some Kosovan refugees here as soon as possible. What is the present situation and why has there been such a delay? Has the original policy announced by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform changed? There is no shortage of accommodation as the recently vacated Army barracks are available, especially in the County Kildare and County Cork areas. The necessary logistical staff could be seconded from the Defence Forces, other Government institutions or the voluntary sectors.

If requested, we should take an initial figure of 2,000. We could thus make a small contribution to the plight of these unfortunate people. I hope the Minister of State will outline the Government's plans and that they reflect the concerns felt by the public for the plight of the Kosovan people.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Ms O'Donnell): I welcome this opportunity to address the House on the very grave humanitarian situation in the Balkans. Every right thinking person is appalled by the human tragedy unfolding in Kosovo. Daily media coverage confirms the worst excesses of ethnic cleansing by the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Serbia. Young and old have been forced to trudge through snow and across mountains or have huddled in the back of tractors moving towards an uncertain future. They have been left bereft and despairing, cast out for no other reason than their ethnic background. In addition, there are increasing reports of mass executions, of individual arbitrary killing, the use of civilians as human shields, of rape, torture and other gross human rights abuses. There are many cases where identity papers and property documents have [906] been taken from refugees and destroyed in what seems a clear move to make their return more difficult.

The pre-conflict population of Kosovo has been estimated at two million people, with ethnic Albanians making up between 90 and 95 per cent or approximately 1.8 million. As of 20 April, up to 580,000 people are estimated to have fled from Kosovo to neighbouring countries, in particular Albania and Macedonia.

We talk about refugees having fled their homes, but we should be in no doubt that what we are dealing with here is the effective systematic deportation of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo. We can only speculate about the number of displaced persons within Kosovo but their situation in terms of food and other necessities and above all their security is very precarious.

Faced with this enormous humanitarian crisis our response must be flexible, generous and urgent. The UNHCR, the lead humanitarian agency, has emphasised that the priority focus is to provide protection and assistance to refugees as close as possible to Kosovo.

There are a number of reasons underpinning this approach. First, it responds to what refugees want. Understandably, many are anxious to remain close to home and hope that return will be possible sooner rather than later. Second, the aim is to facilitate return to Kosovo when this is possible, bearing in mind the need to ensure that refugees can return in peace and security. This is easier from countries close to Kosovo. Third, it is hoped to avoid a mass resettlement of people. Apart from the obvious trauma associated with uprooting people from their own land and culture, there are serious reservations about assisting President Milosevic in his campaign of ethnic cleansing. The focus, therefore, of the international relief effort has been, and continues to be, on providing assistance in the region. The UN issued a revised donor alert on 1 April for $138.4 million, the bulk of which is earmarked for the UNHCR. The most pressing needs are for food, sanitation, clothing and shelter. The International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of the Red Cross launched a joint appeal on 8 April for $567 million.

In response to these needs, the Government has recently allocated £2.4 million in humanitarian assistance. These funds are being channelled through Irish aid agencies and international organisations such as the UNHCR and the World Food Programme.

The non-governmental agencies which have recently received Government funding, namely, Trócaire, Concern, GOAL, Christian Aid and World Vision, are carrying out emergency programmes in Albania, Montenegro and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

In addition, the European Union is providing a package of assistance in excess of 250 million euro through the European Commission to the countries bordering Kosovo. The largest pro[907] portion of this package is being distributed to aid agencies in the region through the European Community Humanitarian Office.

The effects of the brutal policy being implemented by the authorities in Belgrade on the Kosovo Albanian population is just one aspect of this terrible humanitarian situation. There are concerns about the impact of this enormous extra burden on the countries most affected, Albania and Macedonia. The arrival of such large numbers of people in neighbouring countries also carries the risk of major destabilisation throughout the region, and of overwhelming humanitarian efforts, both local and international, to help them. This is also not to forget the problem of how to address the humanitarian needs of those still in Kosovo.

Currently Albania has a refugee population of 355,000 while Macedonia is host to 127,000 refugees. Albania, as the poorest country in Europe, is particularly badly affected. Nevertheless, it has responded most generously and has welcomed all refugees seeking to cross its borders, even taking a number of refugees from Macedonia. Macedonia has also welcomed a large number of refugees, which is putting pressures on an already existing delicate population balance.

The flow of refugees continues unabated. Efforts are already under way to relieve pressure at the border points in both Albania and Macedonia by moving refugees into the interior, but even this does not address the severe problems which sheer numbers are presenting.

It is against this background that the UNHCR, while emphasising that its primary wish is to keep refugees in the region, has been putting together an emergency evacuation plan with a primary focus on refugees from Macedonia. The UNHCR has stressed the vital importance of ensuring that all refugee movements are co-ordinated by and through it, as lead agency. Equally important is that all movements are voluntary and based on informed choice. The UNHCR has also requested that countries respect the integrity of family units.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Minister, your five minutes are concluded but if the House is agreeable, you may continue.

Ms O'Donnell: Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I am trying to give a comprehensive outline.

A number of countries, including Ireland, have indicated that they are willing to offer temporary protection to refugees from Kosovo. Temporary protection refers to standard arrangements under which refugees are admitted by host countries for a temporary period while they are prevented by conflict from returning to their own country. They are entitled to a legalised stay in Ireland, protection against “refoulement” or forced return, and all the other services which are normally accorded to refugees admitted by host countries. These include shelter, subsistence, [908] basic medical care and education. Refugees in this situation would also be entitled to seek employment. An inherent part of the concept of temporary protection is that refugees can return to their country of origin when local circumstances permit.

The Government confirmed last week that Ireland is prepared to take up to 1,000 refugees and this offer was conveyed to the UNHCR. The Department of Foreign Affairs has been keeping in daily touch with the UNHCR on the developing situation. Against a background of continuing refugee flows from Kosovo, the UNHCR has signalled today that it wishes to accelerate its emergency humanitarian evacuation plan and to activate offers of temporary protection by countries outside the immediate region.

As part of this activation, Ireland has now been formally requested by the UNHCR to take refugees. We are now stepping up arrangements already under way for their reception and accommodation. It is envisaged that refugees would come in groups rather that all at one time, and would be made up of family groups for the most part. The Department, the refugee agency and other relevant agencies are in discussion with a number of individuals and institutions in Waterford, Wexford and Cork city and county and we expect to be in a position to welcome the first group of between 250 and 300 refugees quickly.

We are also discussing with the Department of Defence the possibility of using the former Army Barracks in Kildare but the accommodation available would take some months to reach full potential. The Department is accordingly continuing to look for further possibilities, particularly other public or church institutions. Given existing pressures on accommodation and other services in Dublin, efforts are being made to accommodate the Kosovar refugees, to the extent possible, outside the greater Dublin area and in centres where they can have access to public services.

I take this opportunity to express appreciation to all those members of the public and Deputies who have contacted the Department to offer assistance. Their offers have been gratefully received and recorded. The present thinking, however, is to try to accommodate the refugees in larger centres where they can remain in community groups and, as I said, have access to public services. I am confident that our people and elected representatives will welcome these refugees among their communities and, in so doing, show the compassion and humanity which these unfortunate people so deserve.

Mr. Allen: Mr. Thomas Harte was found dead with head injuries in a derelict house at Leitrim Street, Cork city, on 20 May 1997. Gardaí later arrested and charged two men with the murder of Mr. Harte. Mr. Harte's family have been told [909] that because of a backlog of cases at the Central Criminal Court due to a shortage of judges, it will be well into next year before the trial will start.

The family are angry at the delay, saying it is an insult to their dead brother's memory. A family member said: “We are very angry about it. It is as if Thomas's death somehow is not important enough to them. It is obscene. The whole system seems to forget about the family as if it is nothing to them, but it is hugely important to us.”

The delay is causing great distress also to the murdered man's mother with whom Thomas lived. The family had prepared themselves for the trial which was due to start last month. They had arranged leave from work to attend the trial, but at short notice the trial was postponed.

This is just another example of the way the public is being treated by the system. Only last weekend we saw High Court cases in Cork and other centres throughout the country cancelled because judges decided to hold a meeting in Dublin on Monday to discuss the implications of the Sheedy case. Other representative organisations would have held their meeting on Saturday or Sunday and would have gone back to work on Monday but not those who made this decision.

Instead the public who had waited lengthy periods for their cases to be listed saw their preparations put to one side because of an arrogant, thoughtless decision by members of the Judiciary. No consideration was given to how that decision would affect the public.

I ask the Minister to appoint a further judge to the Central Criminal Court in order to deal with the dilemma in which the Harte family finds itself. If he indicated tonight that he was addressing this issue, it would relieve much of the distress of the family who asked me to raise this matter. In addition, the Minister must take an active interest to protect the public by bringing about a more efficient judicial system. I know he will give a positive response.

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): The assignment of judges to hear cases in the Central Criminal Court is a matter for the President of the High Court and I have no function in the matter.

However, in recent years the maximum number of judges who may be appointed to the High Court was increased by three in the Court and Court Officers Act, 1995, by a further three in the Courts Act, 1997, and by one in the Courts (No. 2) Act, 1997. As a result of these legislative measures, three additional judges were appointed to the High Court in 1996 followed by a further three in 1997 and one in 1998.

The need for the appointment of some of these additional judges arose because of the concerns expressed by successive Presidents of the High Court that additional judges were required to deal with the increase in the volume of murder and rape cases coming before the Central Criminal Court. The total number of cases returned for trial to the Central Criminal Court since 1994 has [910] risen from 58 in total to 157 in 1998. This represents an increase of 170 per cent.

Up until 1996 there were two High Court judges available to hear cases in the Central Criminal Court. In 1996, following the appointment of three additional judges to the High Court, this was increased to three and, following the appointment of an additional High Court judge in December 1998, there were four judges available to hear cases in the Central Criminal Court.

In relation to individual trials, the House will appreciate that the courts are, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of their judicial functions and it is not open to me to intervene or comment on the conduct of such cases.

However as I know that Deputy Allen is very concerned about this matter, I have had inquiries made and I have been informed that this case was returned for trial in the Central Criminal Court in mid-1998. The case was entered in the first available list to fix dates on 30 July 1998 and a date for trial was fixed for 8 March 1999.

An application to take this case off the list for trial was only made to the court on 26 February 1999. The application was granted and the case was adjourned to the next available list to fix dates on 25 March 1999. On that day a new trial date of 12 January 2000 was fixed which I understand was the earliest available date.

My understanding is that the recent application to adjourn this case arose because of the non-availability of counsel for one of the parties. I am awaiting confirmation that this is so. In such circumstances it is extremely difficult to guarantee that even with an additional court an earlier date for trial could be achieved. I nonetheless empathise with the family of the victim of this crime, who have had to endure the further delay caused by the recent deferral of the trial until January 2000.

Mr. Broughan: Scoil Maolsheachlanna and St. Monica's, Edenmore are based in the Northside Partnership area which embraces Dublin north east and Dublin north central constituencies. They are part of a disadvantaged area. A survey of the Edenmore parish carried out a few years ago showed that 79 per cent of job seekers in the area did not have a leaving certificate. In a disadvantaged ranking, assessed by the Northside Partnership, the parish ranked 9 out of 10. Against this background the Edenmore-Raheny community have striven hard in the last decade to create vital social and economic development. It has embraced many of the initiatives of the Northside Partnership. It is in this context that I am representing these two fine schools.

St. Malachy's is a boys school with 193 pupils. It is essentially single stream with a joint fourth and fifth class and it has a teaching principal. Last year the school applied for an extra remedial or resource teacher but its application was unsuc[911] cessful. Staff have agreed to reschedule classes to help out with the joint fourth and fifth class and provide extra tuition in Irish, English and Maths.

Many initiatives have been taken by this school to promote the important needs of the area; positive play, shared reading, participation in a substance misuse prevention programme, a partnership in computers project, organisation of arts days, specialist arts classes, discipline incentive schemes, planning and development of school grounds, extension of environmental recycling projects and many more, all of which have been carried out on an extra curricular basis by the outstanding staff of St. Malachy's. Given the numbers of pupils, which breach the Department's guidelines – a second class of 31 pupils and a fourth and fifth class of 30 – there is an urgent need for a resource teacher, a teacher-counsellor or a teacher to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio.

St. Monica's is an infant girls school of 78 pupils with a teaching principal. It has been designated as disadvantaged and has a home-school community liaison scheme and an early start scheme, which was initiated by my colleague, the former Deputy Níamh Bhreathnach. However, despite this, it has not benefited from extra staffing. The school applied for a concessionary teacher last year but was refused. There is a major need for a resource or remedial teacher to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio and to build on the work of the early start scheme.

These are two proud and historic schools who have achieved a great deal in a disadvantaged community and have made huge efforts to better themselves, in conjunction with the Government, the Northside Partnership and local agencies. In both cases, next September each school will need at least one extra member of staff. I urge the Minister and his colleague, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, to look at the proposals they have agreed with the trade union to ascertain if two teachers can be allocated to St. Malachy's and St. Monica's, Edenmore.

Mr. O'Donoghue: The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, asked me to apologise to Deputy Broughan for his unavoidable [912] absence and to take this Adjournment Matter on his behalf.

The staffing of primary schools is determined by reference to the enrolment of the school on the 30 September of the previous school year. This is in accordance with guidelines agreed between the Department of Education and Science and the education partners. The current staffing of St. Malachy's boys school is a principal and six mainstream class teachers based on an enrolment of 201 pupils as at 30 September 1997. The school also has the services of a remedial teacher, a concessionary teacher due to the school's disadvantaged status, two teachers for the mildly mentally handicapped, a shared home-school liaison teacher and an early start teacher. The enrolment as at 30 September 1998 on which the staffing for the 1999-2000 school year is based was 192 pupils as a result of which there will be no change in the staffing for the 1999-2000 school year. This school will have an average class size of 25:1 for the school year 1999-2000.

The current staffing of St. Monica's national school is a principal and two mainstream class teachers based on an enrolment of 68 pupils as at 30 September 1997. The school also has the services of a special additional assistant. The enrolment as at 30 September 1998 on which the staffing for the 1999-2000 school year is based was 78 pupils as a result of which there will be no change in the staffing for the 1999-2000 school year. This school will have an average class size of 26:1 for the school year 1999-2000.

The Deputy will appreciate that the Government has very significantly improved the staffing schedule for primary schools for the coming year. For the first time in many years new primary teaching posts are being created and the instances of very large classes will be dramatically reduced. In addition, a breakthrough series of supports for children with special needs have been in place and every school will have a remedial service and every disadvantaged school will have the service of a home-school-community liaison teacher.

I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that it is not open to the Minister to exempt these schools from the national staffing schedule but his Department will, of course, fully consider any application which may be made by the schools in relation to special needs provision.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 22 April 1999.

[913]

24. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the reason a person from his Department was appointed as secretary of the National Stadium Steering Committee; the length of time the secretary has devoted to this task; the cost to his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9576/99]

The Taoiseach: As I said in the House in reply to the same question from Deputy Bruton on 16 December last, the work of my Department involves, to a significant extent, the initiation and co-ordination of strategic cross-departmental initiatives and this is reflected in the Department's statement of strategy. The Department sees itself working in partnership with other Departments, offices and agencies in carrying out this role. This necessitates close relationships and a high degree of cross-departmental co-operation with them.

The announcement by the Government on 13 October last that it had agreed to commission a feasibility study for the development of a stadium for the new century is an example of such initiatives. The concept for the stadium involves a design and quality that will make an inspirational statement about Ireland and its people as we enter the new century. The nature of this high prestige initiative is such that it will require cross-departmental and cross-organisational co-ordination and my Department is best placed to do that.

There is a significant time commitment involved and the official concerned has undertaken this task in addition to his normal duties. The question of any additional resources is being kept under review as the project proceeds. The main cost to my Department will be the cost of the feasibility study which will be £380,033 or euro 485,542. In addition there will be administrative costs arising from the work of the stadium steering committee.

25. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the progress to date in implementing the programme for Government; the plans, if any, the Government has to revise the programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9578/99]

26. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the proposals, if any, there are for review or revision of the Government programme, An Action Programme for the Millennium; the form the review will take; when it will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10102/99]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Question Nos. 25 and 26 together.

The programme for Government, An Action [914] Programme for the Millennium, is under continuous review to ensure that the Government's programme is being implemented. The Government also monitors all aspects of the economic and social life of this country so that we are in a position to respond to situations and needs as they arise. If An Action Programme for the Millennium needs to be revised to react to such needs we will not hesitate to do so.

27. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach further to Parliamentary Question No. 1 of 16 December 1998 on the Strategic Management Initiative, the detailed proposals, if any, he has brought forward for decision relating to regulatory reform, financial management and information technology; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9579/99]

The Taoiseach: As the Deputy is aware, the Strategic Management Initiative sets out a wide ranging programme for change in the Civil Service. It is based on a number of key elements including regulatory reform, financial management changes and changes in relation to information technology. Working groups were established in respect of these issues and these groups have now reported. Their recommendations have been considered by the implementation group which is responsible for developing an integrated programme of change.

The report of the Working Group on Regulatory Reform has now been considered by the implementation group which has set out a programme of action to help ensure that the level of regulation in the economy is appropriate. A draft memorandum for Government setting out the detailed proposals in this area has been prepared and circulated to Government Departments. Their observations have now been received and I am currently finalising detailed proposals which I expect to be able to put to my colleagues in Government for decision in the near future.

Changes to our financial management systems are an important part of the overall SMI process. The recommendations of the Financial Management Working Group were considered by the implementation group at its meeting in March. The implementation group is preparing a report for Government, setting out a programme of action to put in place improved financial management systems. Again, I envisage Government consideration shortly. As I indicated in my reply to questions on 16 December last, changes have already been introduced in the multi-annual budgeting and administrative budget aspects of financial management.

A number of the recommendations contained in the SMI Working Group Report on Information Technology have already been taken up in the work of the interdepartmental implementation group on the information society. The action plan on implementing the information [915] society has now been adopted and implementation of that plan will result in progress being made on a number of the issues identified in the SMI working group report, principally in relation to quality service delivery.

In addition, the IT working group report contains a number of recommendations in relation to the acquisition and retention of skilled IT staff. In December 1998, the Department of Finance reached agreement with the unions on a set of once-off exceptional measures to retain skilled IT staff engaged in Year 2000 work until that work is completed. This includes scope for re-assignment of suitable administrative staff to IT work and, where it is deemed appropriate, payment of a loyalty bonus in April 2000 to skilled IT staff.

The remaining recommendations will be considered by the implementation group in May. They relate primarily to management and financial issues and need to be integrated with the other programmes of action under SMI. I expect that the report of the implementation group will be submitted to Government shortly thereafter.

28. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if, further to Parliamentary Question No. 1 of 8 December 1998, the SMI implementation group has reported to him on appropriate action in relation to cross-departmental issues involving the use of section 12 of the Public Service Management Act, 1997; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9580/99]

The Taoiseach: No orders have so far been made under section 12 of the Public Service Management Act, 1997. As the Deputy will be aware from my reply to a previous similar question on 8 December last, the purpose of section 12 of the Act is to provide, as necessary, for the assignment by Ministers or Ministers of State of responsibility to civil servants for cross departmental issues and the associated accountability arrangements. The Act also requires, under section 4, that the heads of Departments and offices ensure that appropriate arrangements are put in place to facilitate an effective response to these issues. Ministers are aware of these provisions to which I have previously drawn their attention.

Issues of policy, of course, cross departmental boundaries and there is a need to identify new ways of managing such issues more effectively in the future. Already some experiments in cross-departmental working have been undertaken, including the drugs strategy team and the cross-departmental team on SMI. The departmental strategy statements approved by Ministers last year and laid before the House set out the foundation for future work in this area. The SMI implementation group is considering appropriate approaches in relation to cross-departmental issues, in the light of the experiences being gained. I expect that such consideration will [916] address the use of section 12 of the 1997 Act as a means of underpinning progress on these matters.

29. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach his Department's policy in regard to charging for freedom of information requests; the amount of money raised to date from these charges; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9868/99]

The Taoiseach: Section 47 of the Freedom of Information Act, 1997, provides that fees may be charged only in respect of the cost of search for and retrieval of records and the cost of copying of records. Fees may not be charged for examination of records or other deliberations involved in processing requests. The fees for search and retrieval are fixed by reference to the clerical officer scale – at £16.50 per hour. Copying charges are 3p per copy for photocopies, 40p for a floppy disk and £8 for a CD-Rom.

It is the policy of the Department not to charge fees unless the amount of work involved is substantial. Of the 165 requests received to date, fees have been sought in only five cases. The total amount charged was £176.40. No fees were charged in 96 per cent of cases.

30. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Central Review Committee is scheduled to take place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10087/99]

31. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the Government's views on the negotiation of a new national agreement to replace Partnership 2000; the preliminary discussions, if any, which have taken place with the social partners regarding the possibility of such an agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10103/99]

32. Mr. Broughan asked the Taoiseach the representations, if any, made by organisations seeking to be part of the next national agreement and whose members are primarily dependent on social welfare for their income; and the recommendations, if any, he made to Government regarding this process. [10341/99]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 30 to 32, inclusive, together.

The National Economic and Social Council has been asked to prepare a new strategy report which will form the basis for a successor to Partnership 2000. Work on that report is well advanced and it is likely to be completed before the summer. It is envisaged, at this stage, that substantive negotiations on a new partnership agreement will get under way towards the end of the year – probably September or October. In addition, the Department of Finance and other public service employer organisations are continuing their discussions with the public services [917] committee of ICTU. The key aims of these discussions are to explore the position on public service pay policy and to devise a new approach to determining public service pay in the period following Partnership 2000.

With regard to the prospects for a successful outcome to negotiations on a new agreement, I believe that all the social partners share a firm belief in the enormous contribution which social partnership has made to the transformation of the Irish economy. Against that background, there is every reason to be confident that negotiations on a successor to Partnership 2000 will yield a positive outcome. On the issue of representation in those negotiations, no application of the precise kind inquired about has been received.

In response to Deputy Bruton's question, the next plenary meeting of Partnership 2000 will take place on Tuesday 27 April. The main themes for discussion are modernising the public service and enterprise, jobs and small business.

33. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if the communications unit of his Department has received any requests from journalists for tapes or transcripts of members of the Government, Government Deputies or Opposition Deputies; if any such tapes or transcripts have been supplied; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10104/99]

The Taoiseach: It has been the practice of the Government Information Services for many years prior to the initiation of the communications unit that when, infrequently, requests for transcripts of interviews are received from journalists, they are only provided if they are available as a result of being produced for Ministers or their Departments. The communications unit, which is part of the Government Information Services, has continued the practice on this basis.

34. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the number of occasions in 1999 the interdepartmental committee of officials chaired by his Department with the mandate to develop work practices and procedures for the protection of classified information has met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10217/99]

The Taoiseach: The interdepartmental committee established to develop work practices and procedures for the protection of classified information has met on one occasion this year.

At that meeting the committee considered a preliminary draft report which included an inventory of current practices in Departments and offices for the handling, circulation and storage of sensitive official information. It was decided to identify best practices in dealing with the “Top Secret” category on the basis of material from Departments. Information was also sought from [918] the private sector to determine the appropriateness of departmental practices. In the interim, substantial progress has been made at departmental level. The committee is due to meet shortly to finalise its draft report.

35. Mr. Deenihan asked the Taoiseach if there are figures available to show that the GDP for County Kerry is 63 per cent of the national average; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10223/99]

The Taoiseach: The Central Statistics Office publishes estimates of GDP per person for each of the eight regional authority areas. It does not compile official estimates for the constituent counties because they are less meaningful for such small areas. In addition, the data are in some respects not sufficiently robust or not available at county level.

In the context of the discussion on regionalisation, the CSO published in November 1998 broad indicative measures of GDP per person for counties in 1995. These estimates show Kerry to be at about 64 per cent of the EU average.

42. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the action, if any, the Government is taking on the recommendation of the Commission on the Family that family incentives, such as the incentive to marry and form long-term stable relationships and provide joint partnership to children, should be accorded greater prominence in evaluating the outcome of public policy in general and with particular reference to the operation of the lone parent's allowance. [8482/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The report of the Commission on the Family was published in July 1998. The report contains a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the issues affecting families in Ireland and wide ranging recommendations across several different policy areas.

The commission in its report made the point that there are in-built characteristics within the present structure of social welfare schemes – for example, the one-parent family payment and payments for families who rely on unemployment payments – which may restrict the choices for parents in relation to developing long-lasting and stable relationships for themselves and their children. The commission expressed the view that tax and social welfare policies should contain no unnecessary obstacles to couples in establishing a stable relationship and providing joint parenting to children. It also pointed out that family incentives should be accorded more prominence in evaluating the outcome of income support policies.

The commission expressed these views in the [919] wider context of the role of public policy in promoting continuity and stability which have a major value for children in family life, the child's best interest being the paramount consideration in all situations. It is in this context that the commission stated that joint parenting should be encouraged where this is in the child's best interest so that children have the opportunity of developing close relationships with both parents.

The commission acknowledged that the issues involved are complex. They pointed out that income support for lone parent families is and must continue to be an essential priority for State policy in relation to these families because of their vulnerability and the challenges they face in rearing children without the support of the second parent. The commission described the financial pressures faced by low income two-parent married families, and the particular difficulties facing dependent spouses in gaining access to the labour market and training opportunities. The commission sought the introduction of greater equity in support measures so that families in this situation are not treated less favourably because of their married status. The commission called for these matters and other related matters such as the “co-habitation rule” to be kept under review. They noted that a working group had been established by the Government to examine the treatment of married, co-habiting and one-parent households under the tax and social welfare code and sought more research into families and family formation.

The working group has a specific brief to examine and compare the treatment of married, co-habiting and one-parent households under the tax and social welfare codes, including an examination of the income support arrangements attached to labour market programmes, to identify and cost ways of ensuring consistent and equitable treatment of the household types concerned, and to carry out research as necessary.

I expect to receive the report of the working group in the summer. The recommendations of the group and the views of the Commission on the Family will be fully considered in the context of the future development of policies to support the stability of families, as promised in An Action Programme for the Millennium.

In line with the Government's commitment to protect the family through political, economic, social and other measures, some £6.5 million has been allocated this year for the development of family services in my Department. This includes: £2.1 million for marriage, child and bereavement counselling; £1.2 million for the continued expansion of the family mediation service now available from eight centres throughout the country; provision for support projects to do with parenting issues and improved information services for families; and a families research programme, which I launched last month, to encourage high quality research about families to underpin the future development of policies and services.

[920]

43. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will review the decision to exclude Coolock Development Council from the 1998 scheme of grants to voluntary organisations. [10348/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Department's grant schemes concentrate on support for local self-help groups, community development, welfare rights and information work. These grant schemes are aimed at developing people and their capacity to participate in society, rather than at the provision of services or at direct economic development or job creation initiatives.

Grants are not available from my Department for projects which come within the remit of other statutory agencies. Many applications, however, seek assistance for projects that span the remit of a number of Departments/agencies. For example, applications are frequently received under the scheme of grants to voluntary organisations for large grants towards the cost of the renovation or acquisition of premises to serve as a community facility for various local groups. In such cases my Department's approach is to consider what aspects of the proposed work or projects come within the terms of its support schemes for community development and – subject to the overall resources that are available – consider providing funding assistance with that portion of the overall project. However, in such cases my Department's assistance is made subject to the balance of the necessary funds being raised from other sources and this is the situation that pertains in this specific case.

The group named in the Deputy's question provides accommodation and services for a range of groups which operate in the areas of enterprise, personal social services, culture, child care, health and education – for which funding is provided by a number of Departments and agencies, including the Eastern Health Board, programme for local urban and rural development, Department of Education and Science and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform – as well as community development work with disadvantaged communities, for which my Department provides funding.

In 1996, the group applied under the scheme of grants to voluntary organisations for a grant of £117,966 towards renovations at their premises. To put that in context, the entire allocation under that scheme in the Dublin North region in that year was some £160,000. Following discussions and correspondence with the group concerned, a further application was received in 1997 for funding of £53,000 towards the overall cost of almost £80,000 of window replacements, an upgrading of the existing heating systems and repairs to the heating system.

The group concerned had managed to secure a total of £33,000 towards this project through their area partnership and People in Need. In assessing [921] the application my Department took account: of the funding already secured by the group towards the cost of the project, the activities of the group that may be appropriate to my Department, of the overall level of resources available to the Department and the demands to be met. Having considered these issues it was possible for my Department to allocate a substantial grant – £40,000 – on foot of this application. However, I must emphasise that substantial level of funding was made available on a once-off basis only. The focus of the scheme of grants to voluntary organisations is on making relatively small grants to a wide range of groups.

In 1998 an application for a further £40,000 was received from the group concerned towards the cost of structural repairs and external painting of the building and the completion of the window replacements. The application was considered carefully, but was not recommended for funding, having regard to the range of activities taking place in the centre, the level of support already provided and the many other worthwhile applications received from groups in Dublin North that merited financial support.

44. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of places expected to be available on the student summer jobs scheme in summer 1999; the date from which the scheme will operate; the amount to be paid to participants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10324/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The students' summer jobs scheme was introduced in 1993 to provide income support for less well-off students who are unable to get summer jobs and who are disqualified from receiving unemployment assistance during the summer holiday period.

This year's scheme was advertised last week and will operate from 1 June 1999 to 31 August 1999. Qualifying students will be allowed to undertake a maximum of 200 hours work with sponsors at a rate of £3 per hour. It is estimated that about 11,000 students will participate this year.

45. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the future plans, if any, he has for the school meals scheme; the action, if any, he will take as a result of the recent report from his Department on the scheme which recommended that it should be enhanced to ensure a higher nutrition level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7800/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The school meals scheme is a statutory scheme which assists in the pro[922] vision of free school meals to certain children attending national schools in specified areas.

While my Department has policy and legal responsibility for the school meals scheme, the scheme is administered by the local authorities. My Department has no function in either initiating school meals programmes in schools nor in deciding the nutritional quality of meals. Its function is confined to reimbursing local authorities up to a maximum of 50 per cent of their expenditure on the provision of such meals and approving participation in the scheme.

In 1997 my Department engaged independent consultants to undertake a full review of the school meals scheme. The consultants report was received by my Department in 1998 and was circulated to the Department of Education and Science and other relevant parties. The report recommended that changes to the scheme should only be implemented in the context of the development of school nutrition policies and programmes. It also recommended that the scheme should be administered by the Department of Education and Science.

My Department intends to initiate a formal evaluation of the school meals scheme shortly, using the consultant's report as a basis for that examination.

46. Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of jobs facilitators operating in his Department; the plans, if any, he has to increase the number; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10332/99]

48. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the reason the majority of people who were unemployed for over three years or more and left the live register during February 1999 did not receive the support of the back to work allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10338/99]

60. Mr. Bell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the current number of people participating on the back to work allowance and area allowance schemes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10333/99]

78. Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that, for people living in certain areas of the country, a list of certain businesses, mainly taxi and construction businesses, will not be considered under the back to work allowance scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10337/99]

[923]

159. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of employees, self-employed and employers availing of the back to work allowance scheme; his views on the scheme; the changes, if any, proposed in the conditions or operation of the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10399/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 46, 48, 60, 78 and 159 together.

The back to work allowance scheme is an integral part of my Department's programme of initiatives designed to encourage long-term unemployed people to return to the active labour force. There are currently 26,828 persons receiving the allowance of whom 15,685 are in employment and 11,143 are in self-employment. In addition, it is estimated that there are approximately 16,000 employers participating in the scheme.

I am satisfied that the scheme has been a major success in encouraging long-term unemployed people to take up employment or self-employment opportunities with the support of the allowance and the additional supports available. Over 47,000 unemployed people have done so since the scheme was introduced in 1993.

Jobs facilitators form the core of my Department's employment support service which is there to assist unemployed people to take up employment or self-employment opportunities with the support of the back to work allowance. I have no doubt that the work of the facilitators, together with the efforts made by my Department's local office and investigative staff, has made a significant contribution to the reduction in the live register which has been achieved in recent times. It is my intention that these efforts will be intensified and that a proactive approach aimed at helping unemployed people back into employment, training, education etc., will continue to be a central feature of the Department's service to our customers. Improved co-operation with other state agencies, such as FÁS and the local employment service, is an important feature of this approach.

My Department has 33 officials currently operating in the employment support area. In addition, there are ten co-ordinators at regional level and a central support unit for the employment support service generally. I am currently considering how best the range of my Department's services for unemployed people might be developed in the future and the role of the jobs facilitator will be looked at in that context.

No decision has been taken to exclude any categories of business from the back to work allowance. However, when assessing projects for approval one of the factors taken into account both by the jobs facilitators and enterprise officers in the partnership companies is displacement i.e. the extent to which the new enterprise may displace existing businesses of a similar nature. In some instances, displacement problems have arisen and, consequently, each application is assessed on its own merits having regard to the displacement potential.

[924] The objective of the back to work allowance scheme is to provide a financial incentive to long-term unemployed people to return to work. The scheme has a limited number of places and is targeted at people who need an additional financial incentive to return to the workforce. A considerable proportion of people take up employment without recourse to the scheme and this is to be expected. Information on the scheme is widely available at all social welfare local offices and at many citizen's information centres. My Department's jobs facilitators are actively involved in promoting the scheme among the unemployed and with the various other agencies involved.

The scheme is kept under regular review and, as announced in this year's budget, the number of places has been increased from 27,000 to 29,000 for 1999. A further evaluation of the scheme, in conjunction with the back to work enterprise allowance, has commenced and the results are expected to be available early next year.

47. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the extent to which he has evaluated the needs of the less well off with the particular objective of eliminating poverty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10360/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): Evaluation and up dating of information regarding levels of poverty and the particular needs of the poorer sections in our society is an ongoing process. The continuing implementation of the National Anti-Poverty Strategy, NAPS, and this Government's commitment to promoting social inclusion provide the framework for a wide range of policy actions which are further informed by the broad range of organisations and agencies working in this field.

The difficulties faced by the less well off are complex and often compounded by the existence of cumulative disadvantage. It is important that, in addition to income support, an integrated response to the full range of social problems, such as unemployment and educational disadvantage, is pursued. A wide range of research and information is of relevance when addressing the issue of social exclusion and targeting policy to effectively address the needs of the disadvantaged.

The Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion, which encompasses the full range of Government activities in this field, continues to ensure that social exclusion is tackled in a coherent and co-ordinated fashion.

The Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, are currently finalising a report on Monitoring Trends in Poverty for the National Anti-Poverty Strategy, commissioned by my Department and the Combat Poverty Agency. This report is due to be completed shortly and it will update the figures for the levels of poverty in [925] Ireland to 1997. It will provide us with the first update on the 1994 data which formed the basis for the overall NAPS target for poverty reduction. This updated information will allow us to measure progress to date in combating disadvantage and help us to refocus our efforts on those most in need.

In addition to this material, there are a number of forthcoming publications which will make an important contribution in this area. For instance, research due to be published this year by the Combat Poverty Agency relating to child poverty, farm incomes and women in poverty as well as research being prepared by the ESRI on behalf of the National Council on Ageing and Older People, on living standards and quality of life of older people will all help to inform policy actions in relation to alleviation of poverty.

Overall, this Government has lived up to its promise to keep the needs of the poor at the forefront of policy-making. It will continue to do so as a matter of priority as its social inclusion programme is progressed, and the needs of the less well off will continue to be paramount in this context.

49. Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that young people participating in apprenticeships, paying the equivalent of social welfare rates, are not eligible for rent allowances; if he will review this regulation in view of the fact that it may put pressure on those who are not living in the family home to give up the apprenticeship; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10320/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The purpose of the supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme is to provide a basic weekly allowance to eligible people who have little or no income. Those eligible for assistance under the SWA scheme would normally be in receipt of a social welfare or health board payment and would have to satisfy a number of criteria, including a means test. In addition, people with low incomes may also qualify for a weekly supplement to meet certain special needs, for example, rent and mortgage interest payments or a payment to assist with the cost of any exceptional needs they may have.

The legislation governing the payment of SWA precludes any person in full-time employment from receiving a rent supplement under the SWA scheme. A person is regarded as being engaged in remunerative full-time work where he or she is working for not less than 30 hours a week.

Single people on low pay such as apprentices and trainees who are in full-time employment do not qualify for a rent supplement and must provide for their own accommodation needs. I am aware that this can act as a disincentive to work [926] for those on low pay especially where they have significant housing costs.

The responsibility for setting rates of payment for apprentices and ensuring that wage levels for all workers are fair and reasonable is a matter for my colleague the Minister for Trade, Enterprise and Employment. The introduction of a national minimum wage may help address this matter.

Between 1989 and 1998, expenditure on rent and mortgage supplements increased from £6 million to £88 million and is expected to rise to over £100 million in 1999. The extension of the SWA scheme to include the payment of rent supplement to single people in low paid employment, including apprentices and trainees, would involve a significant departure from the scheme as it currently operates and would have major financial implications.

The operation of the rent supplement scheme will be examined shortly in the context of the Government's commitment under Partnership 2000 to consider a tapering arrangement for SWA housing supplements, in consultation with the social partners.

In addition, an interdepartmental committee is examining the transfer of the administration of rent and mortgage interest supplements to the local authorities and the final report of this committee is nearing completion.

The further development of the SWA rent supplement scheme, to address this and other issues, can be considered in a budgetary context, taking into account the discussions with the social partners and the conclusions reached by the interdepartmental committee.

50. Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on whether there is a strong case for payment of the respite care annual allowance of £200 to the 34,000 carers now excluded from any payment of carer's allowance; and the cost of extending the respite care payment to those carers. [10288/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The carer's allowance is a social assistance payment to carers on low incomes who live with and look after certain people who need full-time care and attention. At the end of February 1999 there were 11,486 carers in receipt of the carer's allowance. The estimated expenditure on the carer's allowance in 1999 will be almost £60 million.

Following a detailed examination of the review of the carer's allowance report, I introduced a range of measures in the 1999 budget to improve and develop the position of carers. Over 11,500 existing carers will benefit from the measures I have introduced while an additional 3,300 new carers will now qualify for a carer's allowance. This budget package, costing over £18 million, represents a 40 per cent increase on existing expenditure and is a very considerable addition to the £45 million spent on carers in 1998.

The review estimated that there are approxi[927] mately 49,000 people in need of full-time care and attention. Of this number, almost 11,500 are in receipt of carer's allowance and this number is expected to increase to almost 15,000 following the package of measures introduced for carers in the budget. In addition, it should be noted that there are at least 2,000 other carers, based on applications for the allowance, in receipt of another social welfare payment from my Department, which is of greater benefit to them than a carer's allowance.

The estimated additional cost in 1999 of extending the respite care annual payment of £200 to all 49,000 carers providing full-time care and attention is £7.5 million. Over time as the scope of the allowance is widened, the respite allowance will be paid automatically to an additional 3,300 people next year.

The measures I have introduced in the budget clearly indicate my personal commitment and that of the Government to carers, who enable people in need of care to be looked after in their own homes and communities, and the appreciation we must all have for this valuable role in our society. In addition, I should also say that my colleagues the Minister for Finance, the Minister for Health and Children and the Minister for Environment and Local Government have also brought forward proposals of assistance to carers. The Government is conscious that such a cross-cutting approach is required.

51. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs when the 1997 and later data will be available for the assessment of the National Anti Poverty Strategy targets; and the changes, if any, he envisages in the benchmarks being used to assess poverty. [10340/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): A report on the levels of poverty in Ireland in 1997, based on the 1997 living in Ireland survey, is currently being prepared by the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, on behalf of my Department and the Combat Poverty Agency. This report is expected to be finalised around the end of April and will update the 1994 data which formed the basis for the overall target for poverty reduction contained in the National Anti-Poverty Strategy, NAPS.

Information on progress against other NAPS targets continues to be made available from time to time from various sources. The latest information regarding school retention rates is from the 1997 annual school leavers survey which relates to the 1995-6 school year. The Central Statistics Office latest estimate for unemployment relates to March 1999 when the rate was estimated to be just 6.7 per cent. In addition, the key NAPS target that all social welfare rates should reach the minimum levels recommended by the [928] Commission on Social Welfare by the end of 1999 has been provided for in the 1999 budget.

The NAPS Interdepartmental policy committee will be shortly presenting its first annual report on the strategy. This will contain a comprehensive account of the various measures and programmes which are being pursued across Government Departments and agencies which promote social inclusion and combat disadvantage. This report will also describe the progress made to date against the targets set down in the NAPS and will consider the need to review them in light of developments to date.

As part of that review, it will be necessary to take account of all relevant information in relation to the various topics, including for example the ESRI's review of the Commission on Social Welfare's minimum adequate rates and the National Pensions Policy Initiative's, “Securing Retirement Income”.

In addition, the views of the ESRI on the technical considerations which may apply when setting revised targets for the level of consistent poverty will also be obtained. In this regard it is worth noting that the ESRI will, as part of their forthcoming report, be conducting a review of the basic deprivation index, used in the definition of consistent poverty, to ensure that the concept remains relevant in the current economic and social climate.

Other aspects which will require consideration are the appropriate time scale to be used when setting targets and whether or not there are any other particular areas which may benefit from the establishment of specific targets.

52. Mr. McDowell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the proposals, if any, he will make on the individualisation of all adult social welfare payments. [10353/99]

70. Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will update the calculation by the Joint Committee on the Family in September 1996 which showed that a couple with one earner living apart with children would be financially worse off by £76 per week if they married, a couple on social welfare in the same circumstances who marry would be financially worse off by £27.50 per week and a couple with both earning would be financially worse off by £87.35 per week; and the steps, if any, the Government will take to remedy any ongoing anomalies in this area. [8481/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 52 and 70 together.

The design of the social welfare system is based on the assumption that there are economies of scale where a couple live together, whether married or cohabiting. This means that, generally, in [929] means-tested arrangements there will be a reduction in the overall social welfare income of a couple compared to the situation where each lived separately. In the case of a lone parent the reduction in income can be greater than in the case of an unemployed couple due to the more generous means-testing arrangements in respect of one parent family payment. This arises from the desire to have a strong incentive to work built into the one parent family payment arrangements.

There is a demand for individualisation of all social welfare payments to address the scenarios outlined in the report to which the Deputy refers. However, this is a very complex issue as there can be many different forms of individualisation. At one level it could involve paying half the appropriate social welfare payment for a couple to each of the couple to more complex forms involving individual means testing and payments to spouses or partners in their own right.

The same issue does not arise in respect of social insurance payments as, where each of a couple has an entitlement in his/her own right, a personal rate payment will be awarded to both. Therefore, with more people entering social insurance, which is the current trend, the reliance on means-tested payments will be reduced.

On the tax side there is individualisation of treatment in that all couples can elect to be assessed as two single people. However, in the majority of cases where the taxable incomes of each of the married couple differ, joint assessment is the better option due to the transferability of rate bands and allowances. Such transferability is not allowed in the case of cohabiting couples.

The independent operation of the social welfare and the tax systems and their subsequent interaction can lead to significant reductions in the income of a couple versus two people living apart.

In relation to updating the figures in the report as requested by the Deputy, the present position is that a couple with a child where one is earning will experience a weekly reduction of £76.29 in overall income if they marry. Where they are both receiving social welfare the reduction will be £32.60 and where they are both earning it will be £98.26. The reductions in income are, in the main, a result of the loss of the one parent family payment where a lone parent marries or cohabits.

The change in income is less dramatic for social welfare recipients as the loss of the one parent family payment is to some extent compensated for by the payment of a qualified adult allowance. At present this stands at about 60 per cent of the full personal rate which is in line with the recommendations of the Commission on Social Welfare 1986 and which, as already stated, reflects the economies of scale which are considered to exist where two people are living together.

The one parent family payment is designed to support a lone parent who is rearing children without the support of a partner. I am anxious to [930] encourage and to facilitate lone parents becoming involved in long-term stable relationships and to eliminate any disincentives to this which might exist in the system. However, given the rationale behind the one parent family payment and the assumptions underlying the payment of qualified adult allowances achieving this without reductions in income poses many difficult and complex problems for both the tax and social welfare systems.

This is also part of a wider agenda to do with the manner in which single parent, married and co-habiting couples are dealt with under both systems.

In this regard an interdepartmental group, chaired by my Department, is currently examining the treatment of different types of households under both the tax and social welfare systems. The group is, amongst other things, charged with identifying and costing ways of ensuring consistent and equitable treatment of different types of household under both systems. The establishment of this group also marks the first stage in meeting the commitment in the national anti-poverty strategy to examine the individualisation of social welfare payments.

The group will complete its work in the next couple of months.

53. Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the progress, if any, made on the question of integration of pensions in the context of the forthcoming pensions Bill. [10351/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I have expressed concern on a number of occasions in the House regarding the process of integration, most recently during the passage of the 1999 Social Welfare Act.

In this year's Act, I have provided that any reduction in occupational pensions in payment, as a result of increases in the social welfare pension, will be prohibited. The effect of the amendment is to prohibit occupational pensions in payment from being reduced in any one year from the level obtaining in the preceding year. This prohibition was recommended by the Pensions Board in its report on the national pensions policy initiative, NPPI.

While there is little, if any, evidence that any pension scheme rules permit an actual reduction in the amount of occupational pension in payment as a result of increases in the social welfare pension, this provision will act as a preventive measure to ensure that such a rule is not, in future, introduced in a pensions scheme.

However, I am also concerned that, while integration under the rules of most schemes is carried out on a once-off basis at the point of retirement, in a small number of pension schemes integration continues on an ongoing basis after retirement [931] under a total pension income approach, which is provided for in the rules of these schemes.

I have decided that this post-retirement integration should best be examined in the context of a review of the indexation of occupational pensions generally and I have requested the Pensions Board to prepare a report on this issue. I will consider the board's report and revisit the specific issue of post retirement integration in the context of a Pensions Bill, which I hope to publish later this year or early in 2000.

54. Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the threshold above which people lose secondary benefits in regard to the back to work area allowance; when the threshold was last increased; if he will increase it in line with earnings increases over the same period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10319/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): Participants in the back to work allowance scheme are enabled to retain entitlement to secondary benefits subject to a weekly gross household income limit of £250. This threshold has not been increased since the scheme was first introduced in September 1993.

I recognise that the application of this income threshold can give rise to disincentives to participate in the scheme for social welfare claimants with families. This issue has been highlighted in the recently published report prepared by Goodbody Economic Consultants entitled “The Disincentive Effects of Secondary Benefits”. I should mention that the threshold does not apply to the retention of entitlement to the medical card.

The report recommended that retention of secondary benefits should be based on an earned income threshold of £250 and not on gross income, i.e. income from employment or self-employment together with the back to work allowance and family income supplement payments where relevant.

The key secondary benefit affected by the £250 threshold is the rent and mortgage interest supplement payable under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme.

In line with a commitment contained in the Partnership 2000 agreement, I have recently initiated consultations with the social partners to explore how best the employment trap associated with the withdrawal of these supplements can be tackled. Consideration of any changes to the income threshold along the lines proposed by the Deputy or in line with the recommendation contained in the Goodbody report will be undertaken in the light of these wider consultations with the social partners.

[932]

55. Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the costs to his Department associated with the operation of the free travel scheme; the other options, if any, he has considered to encourage recipients of free travel to remain active in the community and travel by providing them with access to spare capacity on services; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10265/99]

68. Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to extend the free travel scheme. [10342/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 55 and 68 together.

The free travel scheme is available to all people living in the State aged 66 years, or over, and to all carers in receipt of carer's allowance. It is also available to people with disabilities under that age who are in receipt of certain welfare type payments. Companion passes are also available to certain groups who qualify for the scheme in their own right but who, because of a disability, cannot travel on their own.

The scheme is being further extended from this month to allow Free Travel to carers of people in receipt of constant attendance or prescribed relatives allowance.

The scheme provides free travel on a range of services provided by the CIE group of companies as well as on the services provided by over 70 private transport operators. The vast majority of these private contractors operate in rural areas. The Department is always willing to consider further applications from licensed private transport operators who may wish to participate in the free travel scheme.

The full year cost of free travel scheme for 1999 is approximately £34.5 million and at the end of March 1999, over 537,000 free travel passes had been issued.

The free travel scheme was originally designed to benefit mainly older people in receipt of social welfare pensions to encourage them to remain active in the community. However, over the years, additional categories of people have been added to scheme and the range of services available to them is being expanded as opportunities present themselves.

A fundamental review of the free schemes, including the free travel scheme, has commenced in order to assess whether the objectives of these schemes are being achieved in the most efficient and effective manner.

The review is being undertaken by the policy institute in TCD in association with the Department and it is expected that it will be completed and published by the policy institute in October or November this year. The conclusions of the review will then be considered in a budgetary context, as appropriate.

[933]

56. Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the obligation, if any, on persons who loses a social welfare care to seek Garda confirmation of their identity; if he will issue instructions to social welfare offices that, where a person loses a card and can produce satisfactory identification, such as a medical card, passport or driving licence, this will be accepted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10317/99]

79. Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the status of the social welfare card issued to social welfare recipients and those who sign for credits; if this is a voluntary card with no obligation on persons to carry it with them or produce it when requested; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10316/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 56 and 79 together.

The legal basis for the social services card is provided in the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 1993, as amended by the Social Welfare Act, 1998, Part IV, section 14 of the 1998 Act refers.

At present, the social services card is issued to all relevant persons who hold a personal public service number, PPSN. There is no legal obligation on a person to carry the social services card. However, the legislation obliges a person to produce the card at the request of the Department or other specified body for the purposes of a transaction.

The card is an important requirement in establishing the identity of persons receiving certain payments from my Department. The customer is paid on production of a valid social services card or a temporary signing card.

While persons signing for credits at a social welfare local office are not normally required to produce a social services card, they can be asked to do so.

The social services card is fundamental to the efficient payment of benefits and the delivery of good service to the customer. It is important to have a secure system in place regarding the replacement of social services cards which in such cases are used to collect payment. This also protects the customer as it prevents misuse or misappropriation of the card.

If a person loses their social services card, a form is given to him or her for completion. This form includes a portion to be completed at the customer's local Garda station in which a Garda certifies that the person has reported the loss of the card to that Garda station. The Garda station stamp is affixed to the form. There is no legal obligation, however, on a person who loses their social services card to seek Garda confirmation of their identity.

Establishing the identity and the address of social welfare customers is a vital part of the con[934] trol function in local offices. Where evidence of identification is required it normally takes the form of a long form birth certificate or passport together with another document such as a driver's licence, rent book etc. Proof of identity must be supplied in all cases of new or repeat claims for payment at local offices of the Department.

57. Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of children in the two to four year age bracket receiving back to school clothing and footwear allowance payments; and the requirements to qualify for these payments. [10289/99]

154. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the level at which the back to school clothing and footwear allowance will be paid in 1999; when the allowance will be paid; if he will consider earlier payment of the allowance in order to allow parents greater opportunities to shop around; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10325/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): I propose to take Questions No. 57 and 154 together.

The back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme is administered on behalf of my Department by the health boards. The scheme is designed to assist certain recipients of social welfare and health board payments with the cost of children's school uniforms and footwear. Certain people on low incomes who are in receipt of family income supplement may also qualify for assistance.

In order to qualify for the allowance, the claim must be in respect of a qualified child, the applicant must be in receipt of a qualifying payment and they must satisfy a specified means test. A qualified child is one who falls into one of the age groups specified for the scheme and in respect of whom a child dependant allowance is payable.

The means test takes account of any income over and above the appropriate rate of widows and widowers contributory pension plus £5 where the guardian is single, and contributory old age pension plus £5 where the guardian is one of a couple. Where the income of a household exceeds these limits, the back to school clothing and footwear allowance is not payable.

Under the scheme an allowance of £43 is payable in respect of qualified children from two to 11 years and an allowance of £58 is payable in respect of qualified children from 12 to 22 years.

In 1998, expenditure on back to school clothing and footwear allowance amounted to £10 million in respect of 209,300 children. Statistics are not currently available on the number of children in the two to four year old age group in relation to whom payments were made. However, health boards are being requested to record these separately from this year. Proof of attendance at pre-[935] school is not required in the case of two to four year olds. The only documentation sought is a birth certificate for proof of age and proof that a child dependant allowance is in payment in respect of the child.

As I informed the House yesterday, payments were made to 119,000 children aged between two and 11 years, to 82,900 who were aged between 12 and 17 years and 7,300 who were aged between 18 and 22 years.

The scheme opens for applications in all Health Boards from 1 June each year. My Department will request the boards to ensure that the majority of payments are made by the 31 July 1999 to enable parents to make the necessary purchases in the traditional back to school shopping month of August. Based on the experience of health board staff this represents the opticcmum time for payment of this allowance.

The health boards have advised that the scheme operated satisfactorily in 1998 with the vast majority of families throughout the country receiving their payments in good time to make provision for their children's needs.

As the purpose of the scheme is to assist with the clothing needs of school children in the forthcoming school year, a balance needs to be struck between paying the allowance too early and too late. I believe the present arrangements are satisfactory and I have no plans to advise health boards to make earlier payments.

The back to school clothing and footwear allowance scheme will be reviewed during the course of 1999 as part of my Department's series of programme expenditure evaluations. The review will take into account the suggestions made by the Deputy and the conclusions reached by the Comptroller and Auditor General in his value for money examination of the administration of the scheme in 1998.

Any changes recommended in the review of the scheme will be considered in the context of the budget.

58. Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the status of work being undertaken in his Department with regard to the pensions report, Securing Retirement Income; the interim reports, if any, from the three pensions working groups within his Department due to be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10335/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Pensions Board report, Securing Retirement Income, on the national pensions policy initiative, NPPI, is a comprehensive document and the culmination of a lengthy consultative process.

The thrust of the proposals in this report was broadly welcomed by this Government, in particular the board's target of increasing secondary [936] pensions coverage to 70 per cent of those at work from under 50 per cent at present.

The three working groups referred to by the Deputy continue their work apace. Two of the groups are chaired by the Department of Finance and are therefore the responsibility of my colleague the Minister for Finance. One group is examining the issue of part pre-funding of the future cost of social welfare pensions, while the other is examining issues relating to the simplification of the pensions taxation regime.

The third working group, chaired by my Department, is exploring how best to progress the recommendation to increase occupational pensions coverage and the mechanism suggested for achieving this – namely, the personal retirement savings accounts, PRSAs. The Government has accepted this recommendation, in principle, and the working group is making good progress in its examination of the various issues. For example, the group will shortly have discussions with potential providers of PRSAs. I expect a report from this working group in the second half of the year in the context of a comprehensive Pensions Bill, which I hope to introduce later this year or early in 2000.

This Bill will also make provision for a number of other NPPI related matters, namely the Pensions Board proposals relating to access, vesting, preservation and revaluation of occupational pensions. In the context of the preparations for this Bill, I will also be considering reports from the board in relation to the treatment of pension scheme surpluses, equal treatment, the establishment of a pensions ombudsman and the introduction of a compensation fund.

I would like to take this opportunity to place on the record of the House a re-affirmation of this Government's firm commitment to the consideration and, as appropriate, implementation of the NPPI proposals in relation to occupational pensions. The introduction of the pensions Bill, on foot of these, is a key Government priority. I have already stated that the NPPI report itself was the result of a wide ranging consultative process between Government, the social partners, pensioners, groups representing the interest of older people and the pensions industry. I believe that this partnership approach, which has developed over the years, should continue to be the cornerstone of pensions analysis and development as it is an extremely useful and efficient approach to enabling Government to develop policies in this area.

59. Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his Department's position regarding home helps' entitlement to claim other social welfare benefits, such as unemployment, invalidity and disability benefits, in view of the valuable role played by home helps. [10266/99]

[937]Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): A person employed as a home help by a health board is covered by social insurance in the same way as any other part time employee. PRSI class A is payable in any week where weekly earnings are £30 per week or more. PRSI at the class A rate provides cover for the full range of contributory benefits and pensions, including unemployment benefit, disability benefit and invalidity pension.

PRSI class J is payable where weekly earnings fall below £30 per week. PRSI at the class J rate provides cover for occupational injuries benefits only.

Home helps benefit from the PRSI free allowance which exempts employees from making an employee contribution on the first £100 of weekly earning.

Home helps, who fulfil the contribution conditions, are eligible to apply for unemployment benefit for any days or weeks during which they are not engaged in home help duties but are otherwise available for work. This is subject to the general conditions applying to unemployment benefit, i.e. that claimants must be unemployed for at least three out of six days, and must have suffered a substantial loss of employment. Home helps may also apply for unemployment assistance; again this is subject to the general conditions applying to that scheme. Home helps paying class A PRSI may apply for disability benefit during periods of illness or invalidity pension in the event of permanent capacity for work, as well as pensions in due course.

61. Ms O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the preliminary investigative work, if any, he has carried out to establish support, on the lines of family income supplement, for workers on a very low income in self employment. [10349/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): Self-employed people whose income falls below the rate of unemployment assistance, UA, appropriate to their family circumstances are entitled to claim UA. The rate of UA payable depends on the person's means. In assessing means, account is taken of the net income which the applicant may reasonably expect to receive in the next year.

The Deputy will be aware that the family income supplement scheme was introduced in 1984 with the specific purpose of providing an incentive to low-paid employees with families to take up or remain in full-time employment.

The question of extending the scheme to cover the self-employed has been considered on a number of occasions. Such consideration would have regard to a range of factors including the practical difficulties associated with extending the scheme to the self-employed, the arrangements already in place to provide income support to self-employed people on low incomes and the cost of introducing such a measure in the context of the need to [938] prioritise the use of the limited resources available for the development of wider social welfare system.

The Deputy will be aware that a separate social assistance scheme has recently been introduced to provide enhanced income support to low-income farmers. If FIS were to be extended to all other self-employed people, the costs involved have been estimated to amount to some £47 million, assuming substantial take-up.

62. Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on the future of social insurance in view of the increase in the number participating in the workforce and paying PRSI; if the range and level of social insurance benefits will be maintained or improved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10336/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Government, in its action programme, is committed to the development of the social insurance system and to increasing the maximum personal rate of contributory pensions to £100 per week by 2002. Significant progress towards achieving this target has been made in the last two budgets which provided for a total increase of £11 per week, to £89 per week, in the maximum personal rates of contributory pensions. Apart from pensions, the social insurance system provides for a range of important short-term benefits such as unemployment and disability benefits. These benefits have been subject to ongoing improvement over the years. For example, a new bereavement grant was introduced earlier this year replacing the death grant. The grant is increased from £100 to £500 and cover was extended to include the self employed and modified PRSI contributors.

I have already indicated to the House that it is my intention that a possible role for social insurance in supporting people who leave employment to care for another person or a further PRSI benefit arrangement for care recipients needs to be explored. These issues will be progressed by my Department during the course of this year.

In recognition of the importance of the pensions area generally, and social insurance, in particular, a number of important developments have already taken place. The report of the pensions board relating to the national pensions policy initiative contains a number of major recommendations regarding social insurance pensions. These include a recommendation that steps should now be taken to establish an explicit mechanism to fund, at least partially, the prospective substantial growth projected in social welfare old age pensions. I welcomed the report and indicated that the board's proposal in relation to part pre-funding of pensions deserved full examination. An interdepartmental working group is [939] currently carrying out this examination and will report later this year.

The financial position of the social insurance system is secure in the short-term. However, the projected increase in the number of older persons in society in the medium to long-term will place significant additional burdens on the system. Following careful examination of the present position, we need to make decisions and, most importantly, to carry these decisions through so that we deal with the medium to long-term issues.

63. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of departmental working groups in his Department; the key tasks of these groups; when each of them is expected to produce reports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10334/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): My Department is involved in a wide range of working groups, committees etc. and also has ongoing business liaisons with other Departments and agencies which deliver related services. The following are the details.

Working group on women's access to labour market opportunities. The key tasks of this group are to review the issues underlying access by women to labour market opportunities and supports, including mainstream vocational educational, training and employment programmes, with a view to increasing gender equity in access to such programmes and improving job opportunities and to make recommendations to Government in this regard. It is expected that the report of this group will be presented to Government within the next few months.

Steering committee for the white paper on supporting voluntary activity. This committee was set up in May 1998 to assist in the preparation of the proposed white paper on supporting voluntary activity. The members of the group have been selected on an individual basis to give of their individual expertise and experience. I hope to publish the white paper on supporting voluntary activity within the next few months.

Inter-Departmental Policy Committee, IDPC, of the National Anti-Poverty Strategy. The IDPC, which was set up to oversee the formulation of the National Anti-Poverty Strategy, NAPS, remains in place and meets four to five times per year. Comprising senior civil servants as well as representatives of FÁS, Area Development Management Ltd. and the Combat Poverty Agency, the DPC is the key agent for addressing central NAPS issues and agreeing future plans and programmes of activity. The IDPC is co-chaired by my Department and the Department of the Taoiseach. The IDPC will produce an annual report on progress achieved in furthering [940] the social inclusion agenda, the first of which is expected to be published next month.

NAPS profiling group. A group of selected press and information officers from Departments has been convened to advise on the implementation of the NAPS public information and education strategy. This is an ongoing advisory role and there are no specific reporting requirements.

The community development programme advisory committee. This committee was established in December 1994 as an advisory committee to assist in the development of the programme and to advise the Minister on relevant policy matters. The membership of the committee is drawn from the Community Development Programme, CDP, projects, support agencies as well as others with expertise in community development. Reports are not produced.

The community development programme technical group. The group was appointed in November, 1996. The group's role is to advise the Minister on applications received from groups for funding under the programme and to assist the Department in drawing up a list of 30 priority areas/communities of interest to be targeted for the development of new projects as provided for in Partnership 2000. The membership of the group is drawn from CDP projects, support agencies, Combat Poverty Agency and Area Development Management, ADM. Reports are not produced.

The Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, – national advisory committee. The national advisory committee of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, advises the Minister on policy in relation to the service. The membership of the committee is representative of the MABS projects and other parties involved in the provision of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service. It includes a number of headquarters and regional staff of the Department. Reports are not produced.

Disability consultative forum. The key tasks of this forum were, initially to ensure that the transfer of the disabled person's maintenance allowance scheme, now renamed disability allowance, from the eight health boards to this Department in October 1996. The forum has since been broadened to include issues concerning the invalidity pension and carers' schemes, as well as issues relevant to people with disabilities. While the forum does not produce a formal report its findings are communicated to relevant areas in the Department for necessary action.

Customer panels for people with disabilities. The purpose of these panels is to help identify and focus attention on specific needs and concerns of people with disabilities and to provide an opportunity for feedback on how the Department's services can be improved. The panels comprise people with long-term illness or disability including carers who are currently in receipt of payments from this Department. Reports and findings are communicated to relevant areas in the Department for necessary action.

[941] Interdepartmental working group on the treatment of married co-habiting and one-parent households under the tax and social welfare codes. An interdepartmental working group was set up by the Government in May 1997 to examine the treatment of one and two-parent families under the tax and social welfare systems. The group is expected to submit its report to the Minister before the end of the summer.

Supplementary welfare allowance scheme A number of working groups with representatives from the health boards meet regularly to ensure that there is an appropriate degree of liaison between health boards and the Department in relation to the administration of supplementary welfare allowance. Formal reports are not produced by these groups.

Pension working groups. Following the publication of the Pensions Board report on the national pensions policy initiative last year, I established a number of working groups to progress various recommendations of the board: namely simplification of the tax regime for pensions, chaired by the Department of Finance; pre-funding the future costs of social welfare pensions, chaired by the Department of Finance; and the introduction of personal retirement savings accounts to encourage increase in supplementary pension coverage, chaired by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs. The above groups comprise representatives of the relevant Departments and the Pensions Board. The groups will submit their reports before the end of the summer.

Local office family service pilot projects group. A departmental working group has been established to oversee the development and introduction of pilot projects to enhance services to families. The projects will build on the one-stop shop concept with the aim of providing improved access to information for families locally through the social welfare local offices. Periodic management reports on progress are produced by the group.

Steering group on disincentive effects of secondary benefits. The key task of the interdepartmental group was to oversee the consultancy study on this topic. That study has been completed and the report has been published.The group will remain in operation to give further consideration to the implementation of recommendations contained in the report which affect a number of Departments – such as the question of information provision. A separate group, involving the social partners, has been established to give specific consideration to the issue of the tapering of rent/mortgage interest supplements, which was addressed in the report.

Programme evaluation reviews. A departmental committee, with representatives from the Department of Finance, was established to steer the programme evaluation process within the Department. The aims of the review process are to provide a systematic analysis of what is actually being achieved by expenditure in each programme and to provide a basis on which more [942] informed decisions can be made on priorities within and between expenditure programmes. Reports are prepared for each programme area reviewed.

Business users' panel. A small business forum was set up in December 1997 by my Department and the Revenue Commissioners to consider how the administration of the social welfare and PAYE systems can be improved and simplified. It was decided to set up a business users panel comprising of employers, representatives from employer organisations and public servants to examine these matters. The business users' panel has 19 members. The panel is a consultative and not a report issuing body.

Interdepartmental management committee on integrated social services system. An interdepartmental management committee to advise and progress the development of the integrated social services system was first established on 22 April 1994. The group published its report in August 1996 on the development of an integrated social services system and now has the responsibility of overseeing and progressing its recommendations. Membership of the group comprises representatives of several Departments and a representative from the health boards. Arising from its findings, legislative provisions to cover the introduction of the personal public service number, public service card and sharing of data in the administration of certain social services were included in the 1998 Social Welfare Act and added to in the Social Welfare Act, 1999. The group is currently overseeing the implementation of these measures across public bodies. No further reports are expected from the group.

64. Mr. Bell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if all Government Departments have reported on their 1998 NAPS workplans; and if the reports will be published and assessed by the NAPS interdepartmental policy committee. [10356/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The national anti-poverty strategy, NAPS, contains a commitment that Departments will produce annual progress statements for the interdepartmental policy committee, IDPC, setting out progress achieved over the previous year in relation to the strategy.

In this context, Departments have provided their reports to the NAPS unit in my Department. These reports contain updates on progress made in relation to the various programmes and measures being pursued by each Department which are supportive of the social inclusion agenda. All Departments represented on the IDPC have now submitted their reports.

These departmental reports will feed into the forthcoming first annual report from the NAPS interdepartmental policy committee. This annual [943] report will be a comprehensive review of progress to date with regard to social inclusion measures which have been undertaken, including progress against measures identified in Departments' 1998 workplans. It will also provide a brief assessment of progress made towards achieving the NAPS targets. It is expected that the report will be published in May and will include the detail from each Department's report, updated where necessary to take account of information which may have become available since Departments originally submitted their reports.

In addition, Departments have now submitted their workplans for 1999 and the NAPS unit will, in due course, be examining these with a view to identifying further cross cutting initiatives where co-ordinated action could usefully be pursued.

The IDPC annual report, together with other relevant documents such as the forthcoming ESRI report on monitoring trends in poverty – which will update our data to 1997 – will provide a valuable yardstick for assessing the progress made to date, particularly towards the NAPS goal of reducing the numbers living in consistent poverty. This updated information will help to refocus our efforts to ensure that we continue to advance this Government's commitment to promoting a more inclusive society for all.

65. Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of applications received for the farm assist scheme; the number of applications granted; the number of persons in receipt of farm assist payments; the average amount being paid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10318/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The farm assist scheme came into operation on 7 April 1999. In order to allow potential claimants sufficient time to submit applications, applications made on or before 31 May 1999 will have their entitlement backdated to the commencement date of the scheme i.e. 7 April 1999. At this time 350 applications have been made.

All new claims will go to a social welfare inspector who will visit the claimant to undertake a means test. It is envisaged that decisions on entitlement should be available in most cases within four to six weeks.

Claimants who are currently in receipt of small-holders unemployment assistance, 6,300, pre-retirement allowance, 1,200, and disability allowance, 300, may qualify for farm assist. Arrangements are being made to advise each of these claimants of their possible entitlement under the scheme.

In drawing up the scheme it was envisaged that existing claimants with means from farming would benefit by an average of £10 per week and [944] that new claimants would receive an average amount of £33.00 per week.

In view of the fact that all new applications are being processed at present, it is not possible at this time to provide details as to the amounts which will be paid.

66. Mr. Ferris asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will consider a double payment of child benefit twice a year to assist families with onerous schooling and other costs; and the cost of such an initiative. [10352/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): From September of this year, the higher rate of child benefit, payable in respect of third and subsequent children, will have increased from £39 in 1997 to £46 per month while the lower rate, payable in respect of the first and second child, will have increased from £30 in 1997 to £34.50 per month. This represents an increase of 15 per cent in the lower rate and 18 per cent in the higher rate over the two years, and involves full-year costs of over £64 million in total. I should mention also that in 1998, we provided for the introduction of a new 150 per cent rate of payment in respect of twins at a further cost of over £4.8 million.

Based on the rates of child benefit which will apply from September of this year, it is estimated that the cost of introducing double payments twice a year would amount to more than £78 million.

Given the very high costs involved, any such proposal could only be considered in a budgetary context.

67. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs his views on whether he should review social welfare legislation with the aim of eliminating qualification anomalies in black spots. [10344/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): As part of its normal business, my Department undertakes a wide range of reviews of the effectiveness of its scheme and services. Such reviews are intended to ensure that the social welfare schemes continue to operate effectively and fulfil their objectives in the light of current needs. These reviews also give rise to opportunities to rationalise and simplify the social welfare system. Any consequential changes to social welfare legislation are normally incorporated in the annual Social Welfare Bill which implements the budget improvements in social welfare.

For example, in this year's Social Welfare Act which was recently passed into law, I took the opportunity to rectify a number of anomalies which had come to my attention. These relate to the payment of pensions to self-employed persons who were over the age of 56 years when [945] social insurance was extended to the self-employed in April 1988. I also introduced a new bereavement grant scheme to replace the old death grant scheme and extended the scope of the scheme to public service employees who pay a modified rate of PRSI contribution and to the self-employed.

The Act also included provisions for the continued payment of disability allowance to existing recipients who go into hospital or institutional care and for changes in the arrangements whereby lone parents can retain their entitlements under the former schemes of deserted wife's benefit and assistance and prisoner's wife's allowance.

I should also mention that, as part of the 1999 budget, I was able to announce that the income limit for fuel allowances will be brought into line with the income limit for free electricity and other free schemes, with effect from next October.

People living in black spots would generally avail of the unemployment payment schemes and-or the employment support schemes operated by my Department. Last year I took the opportunity to correct a particular anomaly in the back to work area enterprise allowance scheme, formerly known as the area based allowance scheme. Under the former scheme people taking up self-employment in areas covered by the area partnership companies could receive transitional support amounting to 100 per cent 75 per cent, 50 per cent and 25 per cent of social welfare payments over a four year period. From January 1998 I extended the scheme to the entire country, thus ensuring equal treatment for all social welfare applicants seeking to establish a self-employment enterprise under the scheme.

In this context, I would also refer to the report prepared by Goodbody economic consultants which I published recently which sets out to examine the range of issues associated with the interaction of secondary benefits and the incentive to take up employment and training opportunities.

In so far as my Department is directly concerned, the key issue relates to the rent and mortgage interest supplements paid under the supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme. As the Deputy will be aware, the Partnership 2000 agreement contains a commitment to consider ways of dealing with the employment trap arising from the withdrawal of the rent and mortgage interest supplements once a person takes up full-time work of 30 hours or more per week. Following on the publication of the Goodbody report, my Department has initiated discussions with the social partners on this issue. The first consultative meeting with the social partners was held on Friday last and a further meeting has been scheduled for next month.

With regard to future plans to simplify the system, my Department is currently engaged in a series of reviews of its programme expenditure. All the Department's schemes will be evaluated, the effectiveness of the various schemes will be [946] assessed and the scope for simplification will be examined in a systematic manner. A review of the back to work allowance scheme is

currently in progress.

69. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to strengthen the fraud inspection section of his Department to ensure that building sites and other places of employment are properly inspected in view of continuous concerns raised by BATU and other trade unions. [10350/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): There are currently 600 officers in my Department involved in the control of fraud and abuse in the social welfare system. Of these, 417 are deployed on a full-time basis in investigation and control work which includes the inspection of employers in relation to their PRSI and social welfare obligations generally.

My Department has a programme of inspection of employers'places of business, including employers in the construction industry, to ensure that they are complying with their legal obligations under social welfare law. A significant element of these checks relate to the PRSI system, particularly to ensure that the correct rate of PRSI is applied.

Concerns have been raised by the Building and Traders Union, BATU, and other trade unions in relation to the operation of the C45 system governing self-employment in the construction industry. This aspect receives particular attention in the course of employer inspections.

My Department works closely with the Revenue Commissioners to ensure that people working in the industry are aware of the differences between employment and self-employment. In this connection a guide, jointly prepared by my Department and the Revenue Commissioners, has been made available to outline the distinguishing features of each type of arrangement and the importance of the issue as far as social welfare entitlements are concerned.

Employer inspections are an important element in the drive to control abuse of the social welfare system and the quality and quantity of these are reviewed on a regular basis. The deployment of resources on investigation and control work throughout the country is also reviewed on an ongoing basis by my Department to ensure that resources are targeted as effectively as possible to combat fraud and abuse where it is likely to occur. There is also ongoing contact with employer and trade union interests in relation to this matter.

The need for special attention to be given to sectors of industry which are more open to fraud and abuse of social welfare payments is recognised. The construction industry is one such industry and over the years various targeted measures have been put in place to tackle fraud [947] in that industry. In some cases, this has involved assigning inspectorate staff to work exclusively for a period on that sector.

For example, a group of inspectors focused exclusively on the construction sector in Dublin, Kildare and Wicklow for a period up to last year. The current practice, however, is to ensure that all staff involved in employer inspections focus, as appropriate, on any area, including construction, where fraud is considered likely to be prevalent and take the appropriate action.

71. Ms O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the steps, if any, he will take to improve the social welfare decision making process which would lead to a reduction in the number of cases being referred to the Ombudsman; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10326/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): A total of 786 complaints in relation to my Department were received by the Ombudsman last year. This compared with a figure of 1,007 social welfare complaints in the previous year – a reduction of 22 per cent.

The figure of 786 complaints must be seen in the context of two million new and revised decisions made on social welfare claims in that year and represents some 0.04 per cent of total social welfare decisions. I am anxious to ensure that any cause for complaint by our customers is eliminated to the greatest extent possible.

My aim is to ensure that people get their social welfare entitlements as speedily and accurately as possible and that a high standard of customer service is applied. The vast majority of social welfare claims are dealt with promptly and without cause for complaint. My Department's customer service action plan outlines the principles of good customer service and the specific measures to be taken by the Department in pursuit of this. I believe that better information services have a vital role to play in this area. As part of our customer service plan, the Department is committed to taking a proactive approach in providing information that is clear, timely, accurate, available at all points of contact and that meets the needs of people with disabilities. We are also establishing a well-publicised, accessible, transparent and simple to use system of dealing with complaints about the quality of service provided. This is in line with a recommendation by the Ombudsman that all public bodies should set up an internal complaints system. A pilot system has already been tested in some of my Department's offices and the results are being used as part of the process of developing a system which can be extended across the organisation. The introduction of this system should reduce the degree for recourse to the Ombudsman in future.

[948] Clearly I would like to see a situation where there was no social welfare complaints. However, there are limits to what can be done in this regard. For instance, in large proportion of social welfare cases the complaint is not upheld by the Ombudsman following investigation. Nevertheless, any person who is dissatisfied with a decision has the fundamental right to complain to the Ombudsman and have their complaint investigated. The Ombudsman has noted the high level of co-operation which exists between his office and my Department. I accept that there is scope for improvement in cases where it is found that the decision was incorrect or that inadequate information was given about the reasons for the decision. I am satisfied that the measures being taken by my Department, as mentioned above, will lead to a significant improvement in this area.

72. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he has satisfied himself that his Department is doing everything necessary to ensure the security of the elderly. [10345/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): My Department has, since 1996, operated the scheme of community

support for older people, the purpose of which is to provide funding for initiatives to improve the security and social support of vulnerable older people. This funding is provided by way of grants to voluntary groups and organisations who have undertaken to identify those elderly people in need of assistance under the scheme.

Under the scheme, grants are available for small-scale physical security equipment such as strengthening of doors and windows, window locks, door chains and locks and security lighting; and socially-monitored alarm system, such as the “pendant” or “panic button” alarm system which is operated via the telephone and is worn around the wrist or neck.

When this Government came into office in June 1997 the multi-annual budgets for the years 1997, 1998 and 1999 for this scheme had been set by the previous Rainbow Government at £2 million in each year. In 1997, I requested the Government to increase this £2 million for that year by £3 million to £5 million and that was agreed. Having reviewed the level of demand under the scheme last year I sought and obtained Government approval for the allocation of an additional £3 million to the scheme, bringing the total allocation in 1998 to £5 million.

Since its inception in 1996 a total of £12 million has been made available for this scheme and up to the end of 1998 some 56,000 people have been assisted by the scheme. This means that since I came into office, this Government has spent £10 million on this scheme as opposed to £2 million spent by the previous Government.

I am anxious to ensure that this scheme [949] addresses the security needs of the most vulnerable people and that it provides this assistance in the most efficient and effective way possible.

As already announced, my Department, in consultation with the Department of Finance and the Department of Health and Children, commissioned an independent review of the scheme of community support for older people in mid-1998.

The objective of the review and the terms of reference as set out in the project brief are to ensure that the scheme is achieving its aims, is being operated in the most efficient manner and is meeting the security needs of older people in the most effective way.

The final report from the consultants has been received and is currently under consideration. I hope to be in a position to make an announcement in the matter in the near future.

73. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of submissions he has received on the Green Paper on the Community and Voluntary Sector; when he will publish a White Paper; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10323/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Green Paper on Voluntary Activity was published in 1997 with a view to initiating a consultation process with the voluntary and community sector leading to publication of a White Paper.

A steering group has been brought together to advise and assist the Department on a consultation process in relation to the White Paper and to advise on issues and directions for the White Paper. The members of the group have been selected on an individual basis to give of their individual expertise and experience in advising the Department.

The group's terms of reference are to advise on the consultation process with the voluntary and community sector and with relevant statutory agencies in relation to the White Paper; participate in same; that is, provide speakers as appropriate; and mediate and comment on feedback and advise on issues and directions for the White Paper.

My intention was that the White Paper be published before the end of 1998. However, at the steering group meeting on 28 May 1998 members of the group expressed concern that this might be too tight a timeframe to allow for adequate consultation with the voluntary and community sector and asked that this timeframe be extended so as to ensure that time is available for the widest range of voluntary and community groups to be involved in discussions and debate about the forthcoming White Paper. As my primary concern in the preparation of the White Paper is to ensure that it reflects the issues that are of real importance to the sector and that there is genuine [950] consultation in this regard, I have agreed to this request.

The consultation process with the voluntary and community sector provided for a three phase approach. The first phase provided for information seminars and invited submissions from interested parties. The second phase involved a series of joint regional workshops for the voluntary and community groups and the statutory agencies. The final phase will provide for a national seminar to which people who have been involved in the initial phases, will be invited to respond to the conclusions arrived at by the steering group.

The first and second phases of the consultation process have now been completed. In this context, 78 submissions were received by my Department and 56 regional seminars have taken place in different locations around the country. The final phase is now being planned. The steering group is currently engaged in parallel discussions with a wider group of people from the voluntary and community sector and with senior officials from the relevant Departments with the intention of developing a consensus on the key features of the White Paper in relation to consultation and participation mechanisms and funding issues. Following completion of the consultation process with the voluntary and community sector, it is envisaged that the White Paper will be published before the end of summer 1999.

74. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the proposals, if any, he has to make pensions available to all women, regardless of whether they are in the workforce or working on home duties. [10347/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Government is committed to ensuring the broadest possible contributory pension cover to as many categories as possible, and recognises that women who leave the workforce to undertake family responsibilities in the home may lose out in maintaining their social insurance record.

Special arrangements are already in place to help people who work in the home to qualify for an old age contributory pension. From 6 April 1994, years spent out of the workforce caring for children up to the age of six increased to age 12 from 6 April 1995, or incapacitated people may be disregarded in calculating the person's yearly average number of contributions. A maximum of 20 years may be disregarded.

In November 1997 I introduced new pro rata pensions so that people who pay social insurance for a reasonable period of time will qualify for an old age contributory pension. A yearly average of between 15 and 19 contributions gives a pension of 75 per cent of the maximum rate, while an average of between ten and 14 gives a pension of 50 per cent. To qualify a person also needs to [951] have a minimum of 260 paid contributions. This measure is of benefit to many women who have gaps in their PRSI records due to working in the home looking after a child, or caring full time for an elderly or incapacitated person.

I consider that more can be done in this area as envisaged in the commitment set out in the Action Programme for the Millennium “to provide the mechanism to allow women, who take time out for family reasons, to continue contributions for pension purposes”. I have asked the Department to examine this issue in the context of a general review of the qualifying conditions for old age contributory and retirement pensions. I expect this review to be completed in the first half of this year, and I will consider the matter further at that stage.

The general question of pension provision both social welfare and occupational, also arose for consideration in the context of the national pensions policy initiative.

Arising out of the initiative, the Pensions Board's report, Securing Retirement Income, recommended that occupational pension coverage targets also include specific targets for increased coverage of women in both employed and self-employed areas.

In this context, the report envisaged that the proposed introduction of personal retirement savings accounts, PRSAs, would greatly facilitate the position of women with broken employment records due to childcare and other responsibilities.

The working group, chaired by my Department, which was set up to progress the recommendation to increase second pillar coverage generally and which is examining issues relating to PRSAs, is making good progress. The outcome of their deliberations will be reflected in the comprehensive Pensions Bill which I hope to publish later this year or early in 2000.

75. Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the waiting list for social welfare appeals; and the average waiting time for a decision. [10343/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): In the social welfare appeals office on 31 March 1999 there were 6,386 appeals outstanding on which work was in progress at various stages of the appeals process.

A total of 14,014 appeals were dealt with by the social welfare appeals office in 1998. The average time taken to process appeals determined during the year was 21 weeks. This average has been maintained during the first three months of 1999 despite an increase of 8 per cent in the number of appeals received as compared with the same period last year.

The average period given includes all phases of appeals including the additional time involved in [952] the determination of appeals where, for example, further investigations have to be made or where adjournments have been sought by the appellant or by the legal representative acting on his behalf.

The social welfare appeals system is a quasi-judicial one and the procedures involved are designed to ensure that every appellant's case gets full and satisfactory consideration. There is an inevitable time lag inherent in such a process which is governed by statutory and fair procedure requirements.

In some cases appeals can be dealt with on the basis of information supplied by the appellant and the Department's deciding officer without recourse to an oral hearing and these would take less than the average time. Where an oral hearing is required, however, an additional delay is inevitable.

While processing times in the social welfare appeals office compare favourably with international experience in this area, the achievement of further improvement in these times is a major objective of the office. However, at all times it is necessary to ensure that progress in this regard is achieved in a manner that is not in conflict with or at a cost to the demands of justice and the requirement that every appeal be fully investigated and examined on all its merits.

76. Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the definitive information, if any, he has which suggests that households headed by women are more at risk from poverty; the steps, if any, his Department is undertaking to address this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10327/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The latest figures available for the risk and incidence of poverty, broken down on a gender basis in terms of heads of household, relates to the 1994 living in Ireland survey and the subsequent analysis of this data by the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI.

The data showed that households headed by women were at a higher risk of relative income poverty in that year at both the 50 per cent and 60 per cent income lines. At the 50 per cent line the risk of relative income poverty was 24 per cent for female-headed households and 16.8 per cent for male/couple-headed households while, at the 60 per cent line, the corresponding figures were 52.7 per cent and 29.1 per cent respectively. At the 40 per cent line, however, the risk was lower for female-headed households than was the case for male/couple-headed households.

I should point out that these figures refer to relative income poverty only and do not take into account the presence of basic deprivation in these households. This factor has been used by the ESRI to provide a more complete picture of pov[953] erty levels and has been incorporated into the definition of consistent poverty used in formulating the targets for the national anti-poverty strategy, NAPS. Because of the definition of household head used for the survey, in the vast majority of the cases where a couple occupy a household the respondent identified the male partner as head. As a result, the number of female-headed households was less than 10 per cent of the total sample, a very low proportion compared to the number of women in the total population. Most of these households fall into the category of lone parent or single women households, both of which were identified as being at higher risk of poverty than the population at large.

This Government has committed itself to the realisation of true equality for women and to ensuring that women can realise their full potential in Irish society. In addition, one of the key principles underlying the NAPS is “the reduction of inequalities and in particular, addressing the gender dimensions of poverty” and a number of developments have taken place which aim, inter alia, to ease the burden on predominantly female-headed households.

A working group to examine the tax and social welfare treatment of married, cohabiting and one-parent families was established in May 1997. Underlying the necessity of such a review was a need to ensure fairness in the way that the State supports families of all types, while at the same time providing assistance for families who are at particular risk of poverty. The group will complete its work in the next couple of months. The introduction of poverty proofing across all Departments, which aims to assess significant policy proposals at design stage for their impact on the poor, is also a major step in this regard. Lone parents, older people, and single adult households are among the groups given particular attention in this process.

My Department also recognises that women in both urban and rural areas can experience particular problems arising from poverty and marginalisation, and that women's groups and community groups have an important role in tackling these problems. Particular emphasis is placed in the various grant schemes operated by my Department on support for community-based initiatives targeted at disadvantaged women. Schemes of particular relevance in this regard are the community development programme, the family and community services resource centre programme, and the scheme of grants for locally-based community and family support group.

The imminent publication of an ESRI report on women in poverty, commissioned by the Combat Poverty Agency, based on the results of the 1994 living in Ireland survey, will give a more accurate picture of causes and trends in relation to this issue.

[954]

77. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the extent to which he anticipates the need for substantial increases in widows' and old age pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8674/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): As stated in An Action Programme for the Millennium, this Government is committed to the achievement of an old age pension rate of £100 per week by 2002. An important step towards achieving this objective was taken in budget 1999 which delivered increases of £6 in all personal pension rates – well above the average inflation rate and, when taken together with the improvements in budget 1998, represents an increase of £11 per week since this Government came into office.

From June the weekly rate of the old age contributory and retirement pension will represent 124 per cent of the main rate recommended by the Commission on Social Welfare, while the weekly rate of the widow(er)'s contributory pension will be 114 per cent. The maximum rate of both the old age and widow(er)'s non-contributory pension will be 109 per cent of the commission's recommended rate.

The Pensions Board in its report Securing Retirement Income recommended that social welfare pensions should be increased in line with prices at a minimum and, ideally, in line with earnings, and that it would be desirable to aimover a five to ten year period, to increase social welfare pensions to 34 per cent of average industrial earnings.

The Government has noted the recommendations of the board in this regard and considers that the question of increases in the rates of social welfare pensions and the PRSI financing implications of these will be examined in the context of the overall budgetary situation and economic climate.

80. Mr. Stanton asked the Taoiseach the agencies under the auspices on his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10405/99]

The Taoiseach: While the question does not refer directly to all of the following offices, I inform the Deputy that the offices of NESC, the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution, the National Centre for Partnership, the Information Society Commission, the Attorney General, the Chief State Solicitor and the Moriarty tribunal in Dublin Castle are compliant and that the offices of the Law Reform Commission, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Central Statistics Office are expected to be compliant by July 1999.

[955] With regard to the NESF, non-compliant systems are being replaced as part of a move to new premises that is under way.

81. Mr. Stanton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the investigations, if any, being carried out by trade missions abroad to ensure that overseas trading partners are making adequate progress with regard to the year 2000 computer challenge; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10383/99]

86. Mr. Stanton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if her attention has been drawn to any legislation introduced in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand or any EU country regarding the difficulties caused by the advent of the year 2000 on the operation of computers; her views on the legislation, if any, in any other country which could impact on business or trade relations with these countries; the plans, if any, she has to introduce any legislation with reference to the year 2000 problem; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10404/99]

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Mr. Treacy): I propose to take Questions Nos. 81 and 86 together.

The Government emphasis in this area has been on raising awareness of the various issues involved. One of these issues has been the need for individual businesses to clarify the security of their trading arrangements with business partners. It would be neither appropriate nor possible for the Government to attempt to check on the state of Y2K preparedness of the wide range of countries with which Ireland trades.

I am aware of the variety of responses in other countries to this global issue. The Government campaign on the Y2K issue for Ireland, which has been carefully considered in the context of our specific needs, has already been recognised abroad as putting us to the fore in terms of preparedness. I am pleased to note that the State's efforts have been recognised internationally. Studies by international observers put Ireland in the same league as Australia, Canada, Holland, the UK and the USA at the best state of readiness. It is not considered that specific legislation would be helpful in this regard.

82. Mr. Stanton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number, location and date of establishment of community training workshops; her views on their role and effectiveness; the plans, if any, she has regarding their future role; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10396/99]

[956]Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney): Community training workshops, CTWs, are voluntary bodies which provide community based training opportunities to socially or educationally disadvantaged young people. The workshops are under the control of management committees drawn from different sectors of the community.

I have no direct function in the operation of the workshops. However, FÁS provides funding for the payment of staff wages, and for payment of allowances to trainees. I have asked FÁS to supply the statistical information requested directly to the Deputy, in so far as it relates to its involvement with the CTWs.

Regarding the role of CTWs, the provision of training for socially or educationally disadvantaged young people is a key element in the Government's employment strategy. The work of the CTWs effectively complements this strategy. In recognition of this, additional funding has been provided in my Department's Estimate for 1999 for the upgrading of CTWs in disadvantaged urban areas. Bearing in mind their voluntary status, I hope the CTWs will continue to play a significant role in tackling educational disadvantage and social exclusion.

83. Mr. Yates asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the proposals, if any, she has to further amend her regulatory proposals relating to the insurance sector, with specific regard to non-investment products and consumer information requirements and equivalence; if so, if she will give details in this regard; if she will meet the trade interests, associations and other representatives in the future to discuss the outstanding matters of concern; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10401/99]

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Mr. Treacy): The regulatory proposals concerning the introduction of transparency in relation to the marketing and selling of life assurance products have been developed following intensive and extended consultations with all of the interested parties. The rationale for these regulations is the perceived need to rectify the failure of the insurance market to provide adequate information to the consumer in the marketing of life assurance products and to generate competition among suppliers. It is clear to me that adequate information both at point of sale and on an ongoing basis is not being provided to enable consumers to make rational and considered choices in relation to the investment of their savings. The recent annual report published by the Insurance Ombudsman indicates that the majority of complaints from policyholders continues to emanate from the life assurance-investment areas. Our objective is to end over-complication, mis-selling, confusion and [957] sharp practice in the marketing and sale of insurance products. In particular, we want to ensure that information in relation to all charges and commission payments is provided as of right to the consumer. In pursuit of these aims, we intend to introduce a comprehensive disclosure package and to avoid piecemeal transparency measures which may lack credibility in the long-term.

Both myself and our officials have already met with the trade interests and industry representatives to discuss outstanding matters of concern, specifically in relation to non-investment products and the issue of equivalent disclosure between the various insurance providers. I am satisfied following these consultations that the thrust of the draft regulations and the supporting actuarial guidance notes will ensure a level playing field in disclosure as between the different distribution channels. In relation to the illustrative table in the draft regulations, two quite distinct aspects of deductions from premiums are being disclosed. Part 1 of the table analyses what the customer is being charged for the product; part 2 states what the insurance intermediary or, on an equivalent basis, the salesperson receives as a result of the sale. Part 1 deals with the total deductions, including specific life company expenses and charges, whereas part 2 discloses actual sales remuneration/commission payments at point of sale as well as assisting consumers in identifying possible product or provider bias. The equivalence element is achieved by looking beyond basic salary paid in the case of a salesperson's salary to include an element which represents the cost of the benefits, assistance and services available which the independent broker would have to meet out of gross commission. The main elements of commission equivalent have been identified in the actuarial guidance notes.

In framing the regulations I was acutely conscious of the need to avoid creating disclosure loopholes in the transparency regime which could lead to manipulation of the system and create competitive distortions. I also believe that the individual consumer is entitled to the fullest information available whether he/she purchases an investment product or a non-investment or pure protection product. Therefore, unless there were demonstrably greater public interest reasons why they should be excluded, I do not think that we would be justified in excluding pure protection products from the scope of the regulations.

[958]

84. Mr. Perry asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment her views on whether operations such as a company (details supplied) must be encouraged to contribute to the Irish economy; if her attention had been drawn to the fact that this company has ceased to do business with many Irish suppliers in spite of the fact they had been led to believe that the business was secure; the commitments, if any, she sought from the company in the way in which they were sought from another company (details supplied) on its entry to Ireland; if her attention has further been drawn to the fact that this will have very serious consequences if the company continues to source all products from the United Kingdom in spite of the fact that these products can be sourced at competitive prices in Ireland; the plans, if any, she has to seek these commitments from the company; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10402/99]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney): The European Single Market gives the right to any firm within the European Union to establish retail outlets in other member states and to source freely their supplies from within the European Union. This is a right which many Irish firms are exploiting successfully, both in terms of establishing businesses in other member states and in supplying the single market. Once the relevant provisions of competition law and Single Market rules are adhered to, it is open to all companies to source their products anywhere within the EU. I am not, therefore, in a position to seek commitments from any company in relation to the sourcing of products from Irish companies. To do so would be contrary to the principles of free trade and would be in breach of our Single Market obligations. I should stress that the commitments of Tesco regarding its purchases from Irish companies were given on a voluntary basis.

The company referred to in the question has met Enterprise Ireland on a number of occasions with a view to identifying the opportunities to source products from Irish companies. I also had a meeting with the company in November last at which it agreed to work closely with Enterprise Ireland to ensure that Irish companies would be given every opportunity to compete for business. I am aware of complaints regarding the sourcing of products by the company. My Department has been in contact with the company and a meeting has been arranged to discuss the matter against the background outlined above.

85. Mr. Perry asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment her views on the fact that, if large retail operations are allowed to go unchecked, there will be significant socio-economic implications for Ireland with the very real possibility of small retailers and suppliers being forced to close and shed jobs; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10403/99]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney): The Minister for the Environment and Local Government made a policy directive and regulations under the Planning Acts in June 1998 to limit the size of supermarket development to 3,000 sq. metres. At the [959] same time his Department engaged consultants to carry out a detailed study on large scale retail development and to draft revised planning guidelines in the light of the studys findings. My Department is represented on the steering committee which was established to oversee the study.

The draft guidelines, which were issued on 15 April 1999 for a period of two months for public comment, essentially deal with the planning issues associated with retail development. To ensure the wider economic, social and environmental aspects of the draft guidelines are considered, I have agreed with the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, that further analysis will be carried out on the likely impact of the guidelines in relation to competition, prices, consumer choice and the supplier base. The outcome of this further study will be taken into account in drawing up the Government policy position on retail development.

87. Mr. Stanton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the agencies under the auspices on her Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when she expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10406/99]

Minister for State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Mr. Treacy): The only Government offices which have declared their year 2000 programmes to be complete are the President's establishment and, more recently, the Office of the Ombudsman.

In the past few weeks, officials from our Department have had discussions with all agencies falling within this Department's remit in [960] relation to progress being made on their year 2000 programmes. These discussions were wide-ranging and focused on the Government imposed deadline of 31 July 1999 for achieving compliance on all fatal and critical systems. Based on these discussions, I expect that declarations of compliance will be forthcoming from the majority of agencies in time to meet the deadline of 31 July 1999.

However, consequent on the formation of Enterprise Ireland in the middle of 1998 – which represented the merging of Forbairt, An Bord Tráchtála and the services to business function of FÁS – the new agency re-evaluated it's IT strategy in line with the revised business strategy. This involved a decision to re-design the grants administration system as the existing one is a legacy system written in old programming language and would have involved significant resources to render it compliant. This decision has impacted also on IDA Ireland which shares the grants administration system with Enterprise Ireland.

The timescale envisaged for the implementation of the new grants administration system for both agencies is the autumn of this year. Our Department will monitor closely developments in this regard.

88. Mr. Stanton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of work permit applications, approvals and refusals, by country, for each month for the past 12 months from foreign nationals. [10436/99]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, (Ms Harney): Statistics regarding nationality are maintained only in respect of work permits actually granted and refused. The nationality of people in respect of whom work permits are issued and refused are compiled on an annual basis. The full listings for the year 1998 is set out in the following table.

Table

Year 1998

Nationality	New Permit	Renewals	Issued	Refused
Algeria	37	12	49	5
Angola	5	0	5	0
Argentina	11	1	12	1
Armenia	1	3	4	0
Australia	230	88	318	15
Bahamas	1	0	1	0
Bahrain	4	1	5	0
Bangladesh	14	37	51	1
Barbados	9	2	11	1
Belarus	3	5	8	0
Bolivia	1	0	1	0
Bosnia	3	4	7	1
Botswana	4	0	4	0
Brazil	16	18	34	2
Brunei	18	2	20	0
Bulgaria	12	2	14	0
Burma	1	1	2	0
Cameroon	2	4	6	0
Canada	156	72	228	2

[961] Year 1998

Nationality	New Permit	Renewals	Issued	Refused
Chile	3	0	3	0
China	49	67	116	7
Colombia	3	3	6	0
Croatia	13	9	22	2
Cuba	14	2	16	0
Cyprus	2	2	4	0
Czech Republican	27	14	41	3
Ecuador	1	0	1	0
Egypt	28	21	49	1
Eritrea	0	1	1	0
Estonia	4	0	4	0
Ethiopia	4	2	6	0
Ghana	3	0	3	0
Guatemala	2	0	2	0
Guernsey, UK	1	0	1	0
Guinea Republic	1	0	1	0
Guyana	1	0	1	0
Hong Kong	62	87	149	8
Hungary	43	17	60	2
India	327	122	449	5
Indonesia	3	0	3	0
Iran	24	12	36	1
Iraq	19	12	31	0
Israel	68	7	75	0
Ivory Coast	3	1	4	0
Jamaica	2	3	5	0
Japan	112	139	251	10
Jordan	6	3	9	0
Kenya	10	8	18	0
Korea (Republic of)	11	32	43	1
Korea (Democratic Peoples Republic)	6	0	6	0
Kuwait	6	3	9	0
Latvia	3	1	4	0
Lebanon	12	3	15	0
Liberia	1	0	1	0
Libya	15	10	25	2
Lithuania	6	3	9	2
Macedonia	1	1	2	0
Malaysia	134	69	203	7
Malta	3	2	5	1
Mauritius	11	3	14	0
Mexico	20	13	33	2
Moldova	4	2	6	1
Morocco	14	3	17	5
Mozambique	1	0	1	0
Nepal	5	2	7	1
New Zealand	126	38	164	14
Nicaragua	1	0	1	0
Nigeria	37	14	51	3
Oman	3	0	3	0
Pakistan	119	104	223	13
Palestine	7	4	11	1
Panama	1	0	1	0
Papua New Guinea	1	0	1	0
Peru	0	1	1	0
Philippines	38	25	63	6
Poland	62	22	84	4
Qatar	1	1	2	0
Romania	46	13	59	3
Russia	70	34	104	5
Rwanda	1	0	1	0
Saudi Arabia	1	1	2	0
Sierra Leone	3	0	3	0
Singapore	24	11	35	1
Slovak Republic	10	9	19	1
Slovenia	7	6	13	1
Somali	1	0	1	1
South Africa	128	55	183	9
Sri Lanka	15	8	23	1
Sudan	23	11	34	0
Swaziland	2	0	2	0
Switzerland	128	49	177	2
Syria	6	3	9	0
Taiwan	0	1	1	0
Tanzania	4	3	7	0

[962][963] Year 1998

Nationality	New Permit	Renewals	Group	Issued	Refused
Thailand	13	8	0	21	1
Trinidad	14	8	0	22	0
Tunisia	10	0	0	10	1
Turkey	39	23	0	62	2
Uganda	1	0	0	1	0
Ukraine	6	7	0	13	0
Uruguay	0	2	0	2	0
U.A.E.	10	2	0	12	0
U.S.A.	1,011	445	0	1,456	27
U.S.S.R.	3	11	0	14	0
Venezuela	12	2	0	14	1
Vietnam	0	3	0	3	1
Yugoslavia	34	19	0	53	0
Zaire	2	0	0	2	0
Zambia	2	0	0	2	0
Zimbabwe	18	0	0	18	0
(Group Permits)	0	0	237	237	0
Total for 1998	3,656	1,874	237	5,776	187

89. Mr. Ring asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the help, if any, given to the employees of a factory (details supplied) in Ballina, County Mayo who have lost their jobs; the meetings, if any, which took place with the former management of the factory and the employees and Government representatives; the dates and details in this regard; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10530/99]

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney): Rowear Limited in Ballina, County Mayo, temporarily laid off 55 of its 85 strong workforce on Friday, 16 April 1999.

Enterprise Ireland was informed by Rowear Limited of its plan to reduce the workforce during a routine meeting, which was held on 23 October 1998, to discuss matters relating to the industry. The company contacted Enterprise Ireland by telephone on 15 March 1999 to advise it of its intention to implement some lay offs. At a further meeting which took place on 15 April 1999 to discuss marketing issues, Rowear confirmed it would be laying off 55 of its workforce for an indefinite period. The company hope to take back 20-30 employees in July or August. I understand all the staff have been fully briefed on the situation.

In relation to assistance for those workers who have been laid off, FÁS will make its Ballina-based placement and training services available. These services include career guidance and counselling; places on existing training courses over a wide range of skills; special training which best meets their needs; and assistance with placement into new employment.

In addition, Enterprise Ireland's west regional office and the Mayo County Enterprise Board will work closely with the workers seeking to find alternative employment.

[964]

90. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the Government's policy on coastal erosion; the funding which has been made available; where this funding, if any, has been targeted in order to alleviate the problem; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10373/99]

Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources (Dr. Woods): The Government is committed to ensuring that the Irish coastline is protected and preserved, both as a resource in its own right and in the interests of those who live and work in coastal areas. Coastal protection works, carried out in harmony with the environment and on the basis of clear cost-benefit justification, are, therefore, an integral part of my Department's policy to enhance the development of coastal regions.

I recently announced, under the 1999 coast protection programme, that a total of 29 projects will be carried out in conjunction with local authorities at a total cost of £4.9 million. This represents a fivefold increase on the annual funding available in previous years. This very significant increase in Exchequer support for coast protection schemes underlines my commitment and that of the Government to tackling the threat of coastal erosion. The projects being funded are at locations in counties Louth, Dublin, Wicklow, Wexford, Cork, Kerry, Clare, Galway, Mayo, Sligo and Donegal and will receive financial assistance from my Department of 75 per cent of the total costs.

I have also committed funding to develop a geographical information system and for coastal and aerial survey work. The data generated from this essential survey work will critically inform future coastal protection programmes.

[965]

91. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the Government's pol icy regarding litter on beaches; the action, if any, he proposes to take to control dumping of waste material and litter at sea; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10374/99]

Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources (Dr. Woods): My responsibilities relate solely in this regard to the prevention and control of the discharge and dumping of waste material from vessels at sea.

In 1997 four sets of regulations were made under the Sea Pollution Act, 1991, to give effect to provisions of the IMO Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships – MARPOL. These provide a legal base for appropriate intervention by public authorities to prevent pollution at sea. Work is under way to adopt further provisions of MARPOL concerning the prevention of pollution by sewage from ships and the prevention of air pollution from ships.

92. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the agencies under the auspices on his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10407/99]

Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources (Dr. Woods): The latest information available to my Department in regard to the year 2000 status of bodies under its aegis is as follows: of the central and regional fishery boards, eight in total, two are year 2000 compliant, and the others expect to achieve compliance at various dates between now and September 1999; Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Marine Institute expect to be year 2000 compliant by September 1999; Coillte Teoranta expects to be year 2000 compliant by June 1999; the Foyle Fisheries Commission has declared itself to be year 2000 compliant; of the nine harbour companies, two are compliant and the other seven expect to achieve compliance between now and September 1999. Thirteen of the 17 harbour authorities, including those who have no computers or electronic equipment, are compliant. The remaining four expect to achieve compliance between now and September 1999.

93. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the agencies under the auspices on his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10408/99]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Andrews): I refer the Deputy to my composite reply of 23 March 1999 in which I dealt, inter alia, with the Y2K compliance of the agencies under the aegis of the Department. In my reply I stated my [966] understanding that all agencies under the aegis of the Department – the Agency for Personal Service Overseas, the Refugee Agency, the National Committee for Development Education and the Irish Aid Advisory Committee – had completed their projects and were Y2K compliant. However, as of 20 April only the IAAC has declared itself fully compliant.

It has now been clarified that, although the other agencies are substantially in compliance, some minor work remains to be completed in order that they may be in a position formally to declare themselves fully compliant. In the case of APSO the IT system has been replaced and, I understand, is fully Y2K compliant. APSO is awaiting clarification on its compliance status relative to one element of its non-IT equipment. In the case of the Refugee Agency all IT equipment and plant, apart from one piece of software, which requires a minor upgrade, are compliant. In the case of the NCDE all necessary hardware has been procured and is expected to be installed shortly and a single item of non-IT equipment needs replacement. It is expected that all agencies will be in a position to declare themselves fully Y2K compliant by June.

I shall be happy to advise the Deputy when the declarations are made.

94. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the reason for the reduction in aid to the Rwandan Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10423/99]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Andrews): From April to July 1994 Rwanda experienced a genocide in which between 500,000 and 800,000 people were massacred. The subsequent conflict and chaos resulted in massive displacement of people both internally and to neighbouring countries. Rwanda, one of the poorest countries in Africa with a per capita GDP of US$220 in 1997, is now trying to recover from genocide and the devastation of the physical infrastructure of the country.

The Irish Government and people responded very generously to the plight of the Rwandan people and practical expression was given to this response by three visits undertaken to Rwanda by the President.

The immediate humanitarian emergency is now over and the focus of our efforts, together with those of other members of the international community, is on trying to establish the necessary conditions for peace, stability and development based on respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. This is in line with EU policy which supports the process undertaken by the Rwandan Government to recover from genocide, promote national reconciliation and reconstruction and the transition to democracy. Important elements in this process are the strengthening of civil society and the rehabilitation of the institutions of [967] government so that they are fair, inclusive and responsive to all sectors of this very divided society. Stability in Rwanda is a key element of regional stability.

Annual levels of official assistance to Rwanda are determined by the needs of the people and Irish aid funding priorities, the number and quality of the proposals received and the capacity of implementing partners on the ground. Irish assistance is targeted at the most vulnerable groups and continues to focus, in the first instance, on meeting basic needs in the areas of shelter, food security and primary health care. Human rights considerations permeate all of the rehabilitation programmes which are supported. However, Rwanda needs to be assisted to assume these and other tasks of government itself and Ireland, with other donors and UN agencies, has provided assistance for clearly identified activities of the Rwandan Government in the areas of justice, housing and health.

Assistance to the Rwandan Government in 1997 reflected the demands placed on it by the return of approximately 1.4 million Rwandan refugees from Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Grants were made to the Ministries of Family, Health, and the Interior to support the resettlement and reintegration of the returnees. There was not the same need for support of this kind in 1998.

The bulk of Irish assistance is channeled through the Irish NGOs, Concern and Trócaire, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN Development Programme and UNICEF. A number of international donors contribute through the UNDP Trust Fund for Rwanda to support Rwandan Government programmes and co-operate with them in rebuilding institutions and civil society. Given that Ireland does not have resident representation in Rwanda, it makes administrative sense to work as much as possible through implementing agencies located there.

Monitoring and assessment teams from the Department of Foreign Affairs pay at least two visits a year to Rwanda to monitor existing projects and assess future needs. In addition, the chargé in Uganda, who is accredited to Rwanda, visits Rwanda regularly.

95. Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will press at the April 1999 meeting of the General Affairs Council, which is required to renew or amend the common position on Burma, for the imposition of economic sanctions, as requested by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, on the illegal and brutal regime in Rangoon to match his stated support for the democratic movement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10424/99]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Andrews): The Government is very concerned at the [968] absence of any improvement in the human rights situation in Burma and, therefore, maintains its strong support for sanctions against the Rangoon regime. The EU common position on Burma is due to expire at the end of this month and we will be seeking its renewal at the General Affairs Council to be held in Luxembourg on 26 April.

Following the strengthening of the common position last October and the cancellation of the EU-ASEAN Foreign Ministers meeting in Berlin on 30 March due to a dispute over the question of Burmese attendance, it is expected that the common position will be renewed without opposition for a further period of six months at next weeks meeting of the General Affairs Council.

The Government will also work to see how more effective pressure on Burma can be brought to bear. We will, therefore, be seeking discussions over the coming months on additional measures which could be implemented when the common position comes up for renewal once more next October.

96. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Public Enterprise the agencies under the auspices on her Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when she expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10409/99]

Minister for Public Enterprise (Mrs. O'Rourke): As I indicated in response to previous questions on this matter on 23 March 1999, there are formal procedures for regular reporting to Government on the year 2000 compliance issues in respect of my Department and the State agencies under my aegis. In addition to regular discussions between officials of my Department and the semi-State bodies, I have met with the chief executives of the State bodies and have also written to the chairmen and chief executives highlighting the importance of this matter. I am informed that all State agencies are on target for timely completion for critical systems. I continue to be confident in the ability of my Department and the State agencies for which I am responsible to cope with the year 2000 problem. As a matter of prudence I will be ensuring that appropriate contingency plans will be in place.

97. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Defence the number of apprentices who qualified in the Defence Forces each year for the past four years; the qualifications obtained by these apprentices; the changes, if any, which have occurred in the training structure or in the qualifications received; the changes, if any, envisaged; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10384/99]

Minister for Defence (Mr. M. Smith): The number of apprentices who qualified in the Defence Forces in each of the past four years is as follows:[969]

Trade Category	1995	1996	1997	1998
Electricians	9	8	5	–
Fitter Turners	9	4	5	6
Motor Mechanics	4	6	9	–
Radio Technicians	3	3	6	3
Carpenters	8	8	8	–
Electricians Servicers Technicians	–	3	–	2
Total	33	32	33	11

With the closure of the Army apprentice school, it is envisaged that, in future, Army apprentices will attend FÁS courses and-or courses provided by the various regional technical colleges, as is already the situation with Naval Service apprentices.

98. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Defence the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10410/99]

Minister for Defence (Mr. M. Smith): A comprehensive programme to ensure year 2000 compliance is nearing completion in the defence area. The target date for achieving compliance for the Department's systems is 31 July 1999. That is also the target date for achieving compliance for most of the Defence Forces' critical systems.

All remaining Defence Forces' systems are targeted to be made compliant on various dates after 31 July, with the compliance programme due to be fully completed before 1 January 2000.

99. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Defence if civilians are employed as pilots of the Government jet; if so, the number involved; their nationality; the type and duration of contract; the cost per year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10438/99]

Minister for Defence (Mr. M. Smith): Under a contract placed in September 1998 with Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation in the United States, the services of a pilot were engaged for the period 1 September 1998 to 31 March 1999. Pilots drawn from the corporation's panel fulfilled the contract and were responsible for the instruction and rating of Air Corps pilots together with operational flying of the Gulfstream IV aircraft as necessary. The cost involved was approximately £100,000 exclusive of VAT and travel/ accommodation expenses.

100. Mr. Power asked the Minister for Defence his views on the appointment of an ombudsman for the Defence Forces. [10508/99]

[970]Minister for Defence (Mr. M. Smith): The question of the appointment of an ombudsman for the Defence Forces has been raised by PDFORRA under the conciliation and arbitration scheme for the Permanent Defence Force. The terms of the scheme, which have been agreed with the association, provide that discussions under it are confidential to the parties involved. Accordingly, the Deputy will appreciate that it would not be appropriate of me to comment further on this issue.

Complaints procedures for the Defence Forces were agreed with PDFORRA and RACO and implemented with effect from May 1996. The procedures provide for the appointment of an independent complaints inquiry officer to investigate grievances on behalf of the Minister. A review of the procedures is being undertaken by sub-committees of the conciliation council established for that purpose and I anticipate that agreement with the associations on revised procedures will be reached at an early date.

101. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10411/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): With regard to State bodies, the position is that on foot of a Government decision, a monitoring committee, chaired at assistant secretary level, was established in my Department in June 1998 to oversee year 2000 compliance in the relevant State agencies. All the agencies have been reporting year 2000 progress every two months and no major difficulties have been encountered.

The National Milk Agency, the Western Development Commission, An Bord Glas and the Irish Horse Board are year 2000 compliant. The target dates for year 2000 compliance for the remaining agencies are outlined in the following tabular statement:

[971]

Agency	Date of Compliance
Irish Horseracing Authority	30 June 1999
Bord Bia	30 June 1999
Bord na gCon	30 June 1999
Teagasc	30 July 1999
Irish National Stud	31 July 1999

102. Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason the criteria for destocking of commonages has been changed by his Department from rights of ownership to percentage of stocking; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that this criteria is going to penalise the farmer who did not traditionally overgraze the mountain; the plans, if any, he has to use more equitable criteria; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10420/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): Supplementary measure A of the revised REP scheme requires that an agri-environmental framework plan be drawn up for each commonage and shall include the following elements: establishment of a grazing regime, including environmental stocking levels for the total area of the commonage; an overall grassland management plan, and measures for habitat protection.

The problem of overgrazing by sheep, which causes a degree of environmental degradation, is particularly acute on areas of commonage land. The commonage framework plans will set the stocking levels for each commonage in order to allow the regeneration of any degraded commonage.

Where the number of sheep on any commonage is in excess of the level set in the framework plan the commonage will have to be destocked to bring it to that level. The reduction in sheep numbers for each active shareholder on a commonage will be based on the percentage reduction in numbers required for each commonage, the commonage entitlement of the shareholder and the amount of non-commonage land grazed by the shareholder. This is the most equitable way in which to bring sheep numbers on commonages to levels which will allow degraded commonages to be regenerated.

[972]

103. Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the fact that farmers are not notified of any problems on their area aid application until months later when their premium cheque does not arrive; the steps, if any, he has put in place to ensure that farmers receive accurate information regarding specific problems on their 1999 area aid applications in view of the fact the area aid applications are the key to farmers successfully drawing down their full headage, premia and tillage subsidies; when a farmer will be notified of any problems on his application; if he will ensure that there will be no delays in payment in 1999; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10421/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): Arrangements have been put in place for the 1999 area aid scheme which will ensure that all applications are processed as quickly as possible.

An important feature of the 1999 arrangements is the earlier closing date of 23 April as opposed to 15 May in previous years. This will allow for an additional processing period in advance of the payment deadline. However, efficient processing is also dependent on the accurate completion of the applications and the submission of maps and other supporting documentation. Correspondence will issue to applicants quickly in relation to queries arising with their applications. A prompt response to such notifications will ensure that there will be no undue delays in the completion of the processing of 1999 applications and, consequently, no delay in the issue of eligible payments.

104. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if discrepancies in the area aid application of a person (details supplied) have been investigated fully; if a resolution has been achieved which is acceptable to all parties involved; if the person is owed any payment as a result; if so, when payment will be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10422/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): The area aid application has been processed for the person concerned. However, the applicant had divided a number of parcels and on checking it was discovered that the applicant had claimed one area of land twice. My Department informed him of the position and requested additional information to clarify the matter. No reply has yet been received from the person concerned and as soon as it is submitted the matter will be examined.

105. Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when a depopulation grant will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10503/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): During the process of determining grant entitlements for the person named, it was established that a number of eligible animals which had not been 30 day pre-movement blood tested in accordance with legal requirements entered the herd. The matter of grant entitlement as well as other aspects of the case are as a result under review. The person named will be informed in due course as to the Department's decision in relation to this matter.

[973]

106. Dr. O'Hanlon asked the Minister for Agri culture and Food when a 1996 special beef premium will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Cavan. [10504/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): Following a field inspection the person named was excluded from the special beef premium scheme for two years which was subsequently reduced to a one year exclusion, that is, 1996. This decision was further appealed to the headage and premia appeals unit which is currently dealing with the matter.

107. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when a Department official will call to a person (details supplied) in County Mayo to inspect his lands and to determine if the area digitised by his Department is correct. [10505/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): As stated in my reply to Parliamentary Question No. 165 of 2 March 1999, I have arranged for an area aid inspection to be carried out to determine if the area digitised by my Department is correct. This will take place as soon as possible.

108. Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when a farm retirement pension will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Kilkenny; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10553/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): Payment of the pension in this case commenced in February 1999, retrospective to 18 October 1998, the date of valid application.

109. Ms Coughlan asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason a grant from Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta for a person (details supplied) in County Donegal has not been paid; when payment will issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10580/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): In accordance with the underlying bottom-up philosophy of the Leader programme, the approval of grant aid for projects and payment of aid to project promoters are the responsibility of the groups approved under the programme. I have asked the group concerned in this case to supply the information requested directly to the Deputy.

110. Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when cattle and equine grants will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Donegal. [10581/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): Following digitising of the area claimed [974] by the above named applicant on his 1998 area aid application, he was found to have an overclaim. Maps issued to him in order to clarify the situation. While the applicant replied to the area aid unit, he did not return the maps as requested and has been written to again in this regard. Payments cannot issue until the matter has been resolved.

111. Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when suckler cow and headage grants will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Donegal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10582/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): The person named submitted an incomplete area aid application form in that he did not submit maps of the lands which he was claiming. My Department issued a map to him for clarification, and this was returned. Following digitising an overclaim has been noted, and further maps will issue in order for the applicant to make any appropriate amendments to the boundaries. His application cannot be further processed until this matter has been resolved.

Application was made by the person named on 22 May 1998 under the suckler cow premium/cattle headage schemes. He has no entitlement to suckler cow premium as he is not in possession of a suckler cow quota. His entitlement to cattle headage will be accessed when the matters pertaining to his area aid are resolved.

112. Mr. B. Smith asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when a company (details supplied) in County Cavan was designated for the disposal of specified risk material; if BSE infected animals are rendered there; the provisions, if any, for the disposal of diseased animals; the safety and health implications of the disposal of diseased animals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10583/99]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh): Since 1997 the plant referred to has been designated to render specified risk material i.e. principally the skull and spinal cord of slaughtered cattle and sheep, from slaughter plants around the country. This material would not come from any animals which have shown symptoms of BSE.

In addition carcasses of animals from herds being depopulated as a result of having a BSE case diagnosed in the herd are rendered at the plant, as are carcasses of birth cohorts, the progeny of such cases, and of bovine animals originating in the United Kingdom. None of these animals would have shown any symptoms of BSE.

All EU and national requirements are strictly complied with at the plant concerned and it has been inspected and audited on a number of occasions by EU officials.

[975] BSE suspect animals are buried on farm, after removal of the head under very strict conditions in compliance with EU and national legislation and under the supervision of Department officials.

113. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Finance the representations, if any, he has received to remove or reduce VAT and VRT from public hire vehicles such as taxis; the decision, if any, he has made following any such representations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10381/99]

Minister for Finance (Mr. McCreevy): I have received a number of representations regarding the removal of vehicle registration tax, from wheelchair accessible taxis. The matter has been considered on a number of occasions but the cost to the Exchequer of such a scheme could be substantial.

As regards VAT, all motor vehicles, including taxis, are taxable at the standard rate. EU VAT law, with which Irish VAT law must comply, rules out the application of a reduced rate or a zero rate for taxis.

I understand that Dublin Corporation intends to issue a total of 820 wheelchair accessible tax licences between now and the year 2001. Advertisements for the first 350 licences were placed in the papers last month and I have been informed that the number of applications has outstripped the numbers advertised. The application of VRT has not been a hindering factor.

In the circumstances I have no plans to exempt wheelchair accessible taxis from the payment of VAT or VRT.

114. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Finance the number of employees and employers who have made applications under the job assist scheme each month since the scheme was initiated; the numbers availing of the scheme; his views on the success of the scheme; the changes, if any, he is considering; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10400/99]

Minister for Finance (Mr. McCreevy): The Revenue job assist scheme was introduced in April of last year to complement the wide range of schemes already available to assist the long-term unemployed back into employment. The scheme is a focused two-part initiative that gives the long-term unemployed an incentive to take up employment and gives potential employers an incentive to employ a long-term unemployed person as opposed to someone else in the labour market.

The basic requirement that must be met by a person wishing to avail of the scheme is that he or she has been continuously unemployed for the [976] immediate period of 52 weeks prior to taking up a qualifying employment and has been in receipt of UB, UA or one parent family payment. The scheme has now been extended to cater for persons with disabilities since the start of this year.

The Revenue Commissioners have informed me that their computer network is not set up in a way that would provide details on applications made each month under the job assist scheme. The computer network is designed to monitor actual take up under the scheme and I have been advised that the development of a system to track applications by employers and employees on a monthly basis would involve programming and testing of software which could only be carried out at a disproportionate cost.

According to the Revenue Commissioners up to the end of March of this year a total 1,112 cases have been issued with a tax allowance which included the job assist allowance. Of these 451 were in receipt of additional allowances in respect of children. The total amount of allowances granted in respect of these claimants was £4.27 million, of which £0.91 million is in respect of children. No figures are available on allowances granted to employers as these are not claimed until the employers in question make a return of business profits.

I am satisfied that the scheme is working satisfactorily both in terms of dealing with the difficulties faced by persons who are long-term unemployed from another angle and in terms of complementing the wide range of back-to-work incentives already available to this category of persons. As I already mentioned, the scheme was extended to certain persons with disabilities from January of this year. I assure the Deputy that the operation of the scheme will continue to be closely monitored.

115. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Finance the agencies under the auspices on his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10412/99]

Minister for Finance (Mr. McCreevy): The President's establishment and the Office of the Ombudsman have already achieved year 2000 compliance and the Office of Public Works, the State Laboratory and the Comptroller and Auditor General's Office expect to achieve compliance in the next month. The Revenue Commissioners, the Civil Service Commission and the Valuation and Ordnance Survey Offices will achieve compliance in July. This work is being monitored closely in each of these offices by year 2000 committees, which report to the Interdepartmental Year 2000 Monitoring Committee, established by Government to oversee achievement of year 2000 compliance in the Civil Service.

[977] My own Department is on target to achieve compliance by June and this work is also being monitored by a year 2000 committee, which reports to me. A separate committee, which also reports to me, monitors progress on achievement of year 2000 compliance in the State sponsored bodies under the aegis of my Department. Recent progress reports from these bodies show that their compliance programmes are on target.

116. Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Finance the reason librarians are not included in the list of trades and professions which are allowed a flat rate of expenses under the PAYE tax code; and the reason librarians are being refused a flat rate of expenses like other trades and professions when they contact their local taxation offices. [10455/99]

Minister for Finance (Mr. McCreevy): I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that a tax deduction for expenses incurred by employees is provided for under section 114 of the Taxes Consolidation Act, 1997. Expenses allowable to employees are confined to expenses necessarily incurred in travelling in the performance of the duties of the employment and expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred in the performance of the duties.

Flat rate expenses deductions are agreed between the Revenue Commissioners and representatives of particular sectors of employees to apply on a global basis within the sector. This is good administrative practice both from Revenue's and from the particular sector's point of view. The list of flat rate expenses issued by the Revenue Commissioners has been compiled over the years following. negotiations between the Revenue and representative bodies of groups of employees e.g. trade unions, employee associations etc. Following these discussions agreement is reached on a global figure which would represent the amount of expenses wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred by that particular group of employees in the performance of their duties.

It is, of course, always open to any employee entitled to such an allowance to make a claim based on his or her actual deductible expenditure. In that case, the expenses claimed must have a sound legal basis and be proven to be within the terms of section 114.

In the particular circumstances of individual cases, tax offices may have taken the view that expense deductions claimed by librarians were not due under the legislation. It is important to bear in mind that there is no automatic entitlement to a flat rate or any other expense deduction. Employees in many trades and professions will not have qualifying expenditure claim.

I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that no flat rate expense has been negotiated on behalf of librarians. If librarians as a group feel [978] that they have a case to make for flat rate expenses they should contact the Revenue Commissioners, Chief Inspector of Taxes Division, Technical Services Unit, 1st Floor, Setanta Centre, Nassau Street, Dublin 2. Tel: (01) 6716777, Fax: (01) 6716688.

117. Mr. Lawlor asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason for the apparent gender disparity in the number of children awaiting cardiac surgery where there are 57 females and 16 males on the waiting list. [10376/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): As at 31 December 1998, the latest date for which recorded figures are available, the number of public patients on the paediatric cardiac surgery waiting list at Our Lady's Hospital for Sick Children was 73. Of these 73 patients, 57 were female and 16 were male.

I am informed by the hospital that certain cardiac conditions are more common in one gender than the other and this, together with annual fluctuations, can contribute to an apparent gender disparity. I would like to assure the Deputy that medical priority is the sole determining factor in any decision to perform paediatric cardiac surgery.

118. Mr. L. Burke asked the Minister for Health and Children the minimum qualifications and appropriate training required by the Medical Council and the Dental Council in relation to those engaged in the use of ionising radiation for medical and dental purposes; the qualifications recognised by both councils; the way in which applicants for recognition under the European Communities (Medical Ionising Radiation) Regulations, 1988, are recorded by the councils; the number of practitioners recognised under the regulations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10377/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): I have referred the question to the regulatory bodies with responsibility for this area. The Dental Council has advised as follows:

The Dental Council is satisfied that all dentists who graduate in Ireland will have completed. as part of their undergraduate programme, a course component giving them competence in radiation protection and techniques. The Council during its periodic visits to the dental schools in Dublin and Cork to assess curricula and facilities satisfies itself as to the adequacy of the training provided in this course component. The Council has approved training courses in dental radiography for dental hygienists and dental nurses provided by the Dublin Dental Hospital and the University Dental School and Hospital, Cork. Persons [979] who complete these courses attain competence in radiation protection and techniques and may carry out medical exposures in the practice of dentistry, under the direction and supervision of a dentist.

The degrees in dentistry and diplomas in dental hygiene awarded by approved bodies in the State are in effect the qualifications recognised by the Dental Council as complying with the requirements of the European Communities (Medical Ionising Radiation) Regulations 1988.

There is no statutory requirement to keep a record of persons entitled to carry out a medical exposure in the practice of dentistry but the register of dentists and the register of dental hygienists, both maintained by the council, can be regarded as such a record. There are 1,730 dentists and 1,340 dental hygienists registered.

In addition to dentists and dental hygienists approximately 100 dental nurses have completed approved courses in radiation protection and techniques. The names of these dental nurses have been submitted to the council by the training institutions.

I have also contacted the Medical Council in relation to this issue. I will contact the deputy directly when information in relation to the Medical Council has been made available to me.

119. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children the capital grants, if any, he has sanctioned to the Southern Health Board for 1999 for the development of services for persons with a mental handicap; the plans, if any, he has to sanction these capital grants in the near future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10378/99]

120. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children the total capital development grants for mentally handicapped services in 1998 allocated from his Department to the Southern Health Board; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10379/99]

121. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children if he will grant aid Cope Foundation in order to provide capital assistance to help cover the cost of the provision of the purpose built premises Fermoy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10380/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): I propose to take Questions Nos. 119 to 121, inclusive, together.

In 1998 I was pleased to be in a position to allocate £1,380,000 in capital grants to the Southern Health Board to support services for persons with a mental handicap. Of this amount, £700,000 was from the national capital programme which I put in place to provide facilities to support the new services which are being developed. I was [980] also in a position at the end of the year to allocate £680,000 to the Southern Health Board region from the £5 million additional capital funding which I made available to assist health boards and voluntary agencies with the replacement of premises or urgent maintenance work; and the refurbishment and up-grading of accommodation for persons with a mental handicap in psychiatric hospitals and other residential facilities.

Capital funding of at least £10 million from the national capital programme will also be made available to support the new service developments in 1999. No capital grants have been sanctioned to date as I am currently finalising the details of this year's programme. I will shortly be in a position to announce the details. The Southern Health Board will, of course, benefit from this funding. It will be a matter for the Southern Health Board, in conjunction with their regional planning committee, to decide on the allocation of this capital funding to specific projects, such as COPE Foundation's development at Fermoy.

Details of 1998 capital grants are as follows:

(a)Capital Development: National Capital Programme, 1998	Grant
	£
Brothers of Charity, North and South Lee: Provision of High Support Residential Group Home	150,000
COPE Foundation, North and South Lee: Riverview Retirement Home for the Elderly	94,700
Charleville and District, North Cork: Development of Therapy Unit	94,700
Co-Action West Cork: Establish Employment Centre in Castletownbere	94,700
Kerry Parents and Friends Association: Listowel Day Care Centre	76,500
St. Mary of the Angels, Beaufort: Establishment of 15 place Day Care Centre for children and adolescents in Caherciveen	94,700
St. John of God, Kerry: Purchase and adaptation of existing premises in Tralee for Employment Support Service	94,700
Total	700,000

(b)Capital Development: Additional Funding, 1998	Grant
L'Arche, Cork: refurbishment and maintenance	30,000
COPE Foundation: refurbishment and maintenance	200,000
Brothers of Charity Services, Cork: refurbishment and maintenance	150,000
St. Mary of the Angels, Beaufort, Kerry: refurbishment and maintenance	150,000
St. Raphaels, Youghal and Grove House: refurbishment and equipment	100,000
Kerry Parents and Friends Association: refurbishment and equipment	25,000
Cork Association for Autism: provision of new sewage treatment system	25,000
Total	680,000

[981]

122. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children if his attention has been drawn to the long delays for chemotherapy at the Mater Hospital, Dublin 7; the reason for these delays; if a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11 will receive his treatment as a matter of urgency; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10385/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): I have had inquiries made of the Mater Hospital regarding delays for chemotherapy treatment at the hospital and I have been advised that most new patients are admitted within seven to ten days of their assessment at the consultant's clinic. In addition, I understand that the hospital has planned for an increase of approximately 25 per cent in its workload for 1999. This should have a positive impact on waiting times for treatment.

With regard to the Deputy's query regarding the individual patient's case, as the determination of patient appointments is a matter for the hospital in the first instance, I have asked the chief executive officer of the Mater Hospital to investigate the position regarding the patient. Given the particular circumstances of this case, I have asked that he reply to the Deputy directly, as a matter of urgency.

123. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10413/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): My Department, in conjunction with the various agencies under my aegis, is working to ensure that there is no risk to the health and safety of health service clients and staff and that there is minimal disruption to services arising from the year 2000 problem. I also anticipate a significantly increased demand for a range of health services around the time of the new millennium. Accordingly, I am treating the year 2000 problem more as a business issue than a technical issue.

There is a major programme in place in my Department and in the various health agencies under my aegis to ensure that these objectives are met. One major aspect of the programme involves preparations of a technical nature by ensuring that systems and items of equipment are made year 2000 compliant or year 2000 ready as appropriate. I am also making arrangements to ensure that comprehensive contingency plans are put in place as an added safety measure. Another aspect involves appropriate measures to ensure the continuity of supply of essential goods and services over the millennium period. It is also necessary to ensure that all the necessary [982] elements are in place so that the anticipated service demands over the millennium changeover period can be met.

Work is ongoing in all of these areas in the agencies under the auspices of my Department and has not yet been completed. However, I am satisfied that my objectives of ensuring that there is no risk to the health and safety of clients and staff and that there is minimal disruption to services will be met.

124. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of applications made in 1998 for consideration as adoptive parents; the number of assessments carried out in 1998; the number approved; the number on each health board awaiting assessment; the average waiting time; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10435/99]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. Fahey): The information requested by the Deputy is currently being compiled as part of the independent consultancy to review the inter-country adoption assessment procedures in the eight health boards. My aim in commissioning this review is to ensure that an efficient and standardised assessment procedure which accords with best practice operates across the country while at the same time having regard to the priority that must be attached to other areas of our child care services.

A draft report was submitted to my Department last month and was referred to the advisory committee established to oversee the consultancy. The final report will be submitted to me at the end of the month. I intend to make the report widely available.

125. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children the criteria under which health boards are authorised to supply people with motorised wheelchairs; the plans, if any, he has to relax the criteria in the near future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10439/99]

126. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount of money made available by his Department for each of the past two years in order to supply people with wheelchairs; the number of wheelchairs supplied; the number of waiting lists for each type of wheelchair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10440/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): I propose to take Questions Nos. 125 and 126 together.

Under the Health Act, 1970, the provision of items of equipment for people with disabilities, including motorised wheelchairs, is a matter for the health boards. The system is that applications [983] for an item or items of equipment, particularly those related to mobility, are assessed on their own merits by the boards' occupational therapists. In making their assessments, the occupational therapists take account of such factors as the age, health status and the social and domestic circumstances of the individual concerned. In making an assessment in favour of motorised wheelchairs, I understand that, in addition to points mentioned above, criteria employed by the occupational therapists require that such a chair is essential to the health and well-being of the individual concerned and that s/he is unable to use a manually propelled wheelchair. I have no plans to modify the criteria used by occupational therapists in their professional assessments of applications for motorised wheelchairs.

Items of equipment are provided under the [984] generic community care, acute general hospital and other programmes operated by the health boards. Figures on the amounts spent on specific types of equipment are not readily available within my Department. However, I would point out that, since taking office, this Government has made almost £37 million additional funding available to the physical and sensory disability sector. This includes special allocations for the provision of aids and appliances, including wheelchairs, in 1997 and 1998 totalling £9.325 million. This year, additional funding of £13.4 million has been allocated for the maintenance and development of services in the sector including capital supports.

The most recent figures available to my Department – i.e. at the start of the year – regarding waiting lists for wheelchairs are given in the following table.

Health Board	Number awaitingwheelchairs.	Comments.
Eastern Health Board	150(Approx.)	Board advises of possible duplication in applications as between their lists and voluntary agency lists.
Midland Health Board	46(Approx.)	Board advises of possible duplication in applications as between their lists and voluntary agency lists.
Mid-Western Health Board	61
North-Eastern Health Board	47
North-Western Health Board	Nil	Board advises that delivery of specialised wheelchairs may take between 4 to 6 weeks.
South-Eastern Health Board	173	Board advises that this number is awaiting assessment and not all may require a wheelchair.
Southern Health Board	21	Waiting list for non-motorised wheelchairs is fully addressed. The number shows applications for motorised wheelchairs.
Western Health Board	83	Board advises that a further 200 people are awaiting assessment – not all may require a wheelchair.

127. Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children if additional funding will be provided to the Western Alzheimer Foundation for a respite home in Ballindine, County Mayo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10456/99]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Dr. Moffatt): Ongoing additional revenue funding of £20,000 a year was provided this year to the Western Alzheimer Foundation. An application on behalf of the Western Alzheimer Foundation for a grant from the 1999 national lottery fund was received in my Department at the beginning of March and will be considered in due course, along with the many other applications received.

128. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of child care facilities inspected in the Dublin area; the reduction in places on average recommended in each of these inspections; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10516/99]

129. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of child care facilities inspected in each of the health board areas; the reduction in places on average recommended in each of these inspections; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10517/99]

130. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Health and Children the timetable which child care facilities have been given where they have to reduce the numbers attending; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10518/99]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. Fahey): The purpose of the Child Care (Pre-School Services) Regulations, 1996, is to build on the existing good standards in our pre-school services and gradually improve standards throughout the sector to secure the health, safety and welfare of pre-school children and to promote the development of children attending pre-school services.

Under the regulations, pre-school providers are obliged to notify their local health board that they are carrying on or proposing to carry on a pre-school service. On receipt of notification the health board will provide relevant information to [985] the applicant and arrange for an inspection to be carried out by an authorised person.

The number of inspections carried out to date are set out as follows:

	No. of Inspections
EHB (Dublin)	233
EHB (outside Dublin)	98
MHB	124
MWHB	265
NEHB	146
NWHB	83
SEHB	230
SHB	370
WHB	171

The information on the reduction in number of places arising from the inspection process is being prepared by the health boards and I will forward it to the Deputy when it becomes available.

The requirement to reduce places is mainly related to the availability of adequate space per child in the premises and-or the requirement to have a sufficient number of competent adults supervising the pre-school children in the service at all times.

Where deficiencies are identified, the health board and the providers work in a co-operative manner to make specific improvements in a planned way provided that any delay would not adversely affect the welfare of children. The plan may include a reduction in numbers achieved through natural reduction i.e. not replacing children who leave during the year, reducing numbers on a phased basis, reducing numbers at the beginning of the next school year or the provider moving to a larger premises. The timescale for making improvements may vary from a requirement for immediate action if the health and safety of children is at risk or may extend to six months if it is appropriate to use a phased approach.

131. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Health and Children his views on whether it is the responsibility of crèche owners to keep a record of children's inoculations; if this is part of the regulations of the Child Care Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10519/99]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. Fahey): Under Article 13 (1) of the Child Care (Pre-School Services) Regulations, 1996, a person carrying on a pre-school service is required to keep a register in respect of each pre-school child attending the service. Subsection (h) of the article provides that a “record of immunisations, if any, received by the pre-school child” be among the particulars entered in the register. This requirement does not apply to a person carrying on a pre-school service in a drop-in centre.

The main purpose for recording this information is that in the event of an outbreak of [986] infectious disease it is important to know which children are at risk through not being immunised.

132. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children when the last salary review took place for the people issuing birth, death and marriage certificates; the plans, if any, he has to review their salary in the near future; and the present payment to these people for the issue of each individual certificate. [10520/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): The administration of the registration system for births, deaths and marriages is primarily a matter for An t-Árd-Chláraitheoir, Registrar-General, of Births, Deaths and Marriages and for local registrars who operate under his general direction. Registrars, who are permanent and pensionable employees of the health boards, are paid the salaries appropriate to their substantive clerical and administrative grades and they remit any registration fees to the health boards. Persons appointed registrars, who are not permanent and pensionable employees of the health boards, derive their incomes from fees for registrations and fees for the certificates issued by them. The fees currently payable to registrars appointed under the various Registration Acts are set out in S.I. No. 278 of 1987. These fees are under review.

133. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) in County Mayo was discharged from the Western Health Board orthodontic waiting list in view of the fact her dentist confirmed on three occasions the need for proper orthodontic treatment. [10521/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): As the provision of orthodontic treatment to eligible persons in County Mayo is the statutory responsibility of the Western Health Board I have asked the Chief Executive Officer of the Western Health Board to investigate the position in relation to this case and to reply to the Deputy directly as a matter of urgency.

134. Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Health and Children if the provisions of S200/49 under which pension rights were conferred on temporary ophthalmologists employed by health boards will be extended to afford similar entitlement to persons who were employed as temporary county surgeons and temporary district medical officers and, in particular, the service of a person (details supplied) in County Wexford; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10522/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): Arrangements made in relation to former tem[987] porary ophthalmologists arose from a working party report in relation to this group in 1981. The change was made in the context of a review of the nature and delivery of ophthalmic services in the community which recognised the need to place the service on a more structured footing. The recognition of temporary service as permanent service was applied, under very specific conditions, to certain postholders on the basis of the acceptance that such posts would now be phased out to be replaced by community ophthalmic physician posts. These posts would be recruited by the Local Appointments Commission. The offer was also made on the basis that those electing to accept the office would be liable for appropriate contributions for past service.

I must emphasise that the review carried out was specific to this group based on the profile of the working arrangements and the plans for the future delivery of that particular service. Accordingly, I do not propose any changes in the pensionable status of former temporary district medical officers and county surgeons.

I would, however, point out that the recent agreement with the Irish Medical Organisation, dealing principally with the matter of extending medical card income eligibility for the over 70s, contains a provision providing for an ex gratia payment of £1,000 to retired former temporary district medical officers. This payment will be applicable to the individual to whom the Deputy refers who also benefited from a non-pensionable gratuity paid under the relevant regulations by the South Eastern Health Board in 1984.

135. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Health and Children if a medical card will be granted to a person (details supplied) in Dublin 22 in view of his severe health problems. [10523/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): The determination of eligibility for medical cards is the responsibility of the chief executive officer of the appropriate health board. I, as Minister for Health and Children, do not have a function in the issue of medical cards to individuals. However, as the determination of eligibility of the person concerned rests with the chief executive officer of the Eastern Health Board I have asked him to have the matter investigated and to reply directly to the Deputy.

[988]

136. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) in County Tipperary is not allowed by the National Validation Body to work in Ireland in spite of the fact that she has received an opinion from the European Commission Directorate General XV which states that her qualifi cations are sufficient to allow her to work here. [10524/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): The National Social Work Qualifications Board is the statutory body appointed to accredit non-national qualifications for social workers and as such, I do not have a function in this regard. The case referred to by the Deputy has been referred to the board and the director of the board has been asked to contact the Deputy directly on the matter.

137. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Health and Children the measures, if any, he proposes to reduce the level of payments of doubtful claims to pharmacies for dispensing drugs to medical card holders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10525/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): Most of the GMS pharmacy claims which are categorised as doubtful by the Comptroller and Auditor General arise because the patient numbers quoted are either illegible or are not currently eligible – many will have been issued with the new numbers but the old numbers are still used. The replacement of paper medical cards by laminated plastic cards in the early months of 1998 which are used in conjunction with imprinters supplied to each doctor and dentist should bring about a significant improvement in both accuracy and legibility of patient data on forms issued by doctors and dentists. Further improvements will be realised when more of the claims are being submitted electronically. There is currently a major pilot project in place under which almost 100,000 claims are currently being transmitted electronically each month.

138. Mr. Haughey asked the Minister for Health and Children the services and benefits available from his Department and health boards to a lone parent and her family in a situation whereby she has three children, two of whom are aged 24 and four who have cerebral palsy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10526/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): The provision of health services is a matter for the health boards. There is a very wide variety of health and support services available for people with disabilities from the health boards and from voluntary agencies working in the sector who provide services on behalf of the boards. I would advise the Deputy that the person concerned contacts the local community services office of her health board and they will provide the necessary information on services and entitlements.

[989]

139. Ms Clune asked the Minister for Health and Children the procedures in place to ensure that all smear tests carried out in the Southern Health Board region have followed the correct test procedure; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10537/99]

Minister for Health and Children (Mr. Cowen): My Department has been in touch with each acute hospital in the Southern Health Board region and each has confirmed that it has test procedures in place for cervical screening. These procedures for routine cytology include screening by a cytotechnician; a rapid re-screen of slides by a second technician; referral of all positive or suggested abnormal smears to a pathologist for a final report and double screening of smears which give rise to any clinical suspicion.

140. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the amount allocated to Kildare County Council for 1999 in respect of water and sewerage schemes including group schemes; the moneys, if any, specifically earmarked for particular schemes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10366/99]

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey): My Department has made a block grant allocation of £592,250 to Kildare County Council in 1999 for the rural water programme which includes: (i) group schemes – capital grants (£275,000); (ii) group schemes – take over of schemes (£60,000) and, (iii) small public schemes (£257,250).

Details of Kildare schemes included in my Departments 1999 water and sewerage services investment programme are set out in a press release issued on 25 January last, a copy of which is available in the Oireachtas Library. Financial allocations are not made on an annual basis to local authorities in respect of such schemes. In the case of these schemes payments are made to local authorities on foot of certified expenditure.

Detail of schemes included in the serviced land initiative, which are being funded at the rate of 40 per cent of the approved cost are as follows:

Scheme	Cost£
Ballymore Eustace Sewerage Treatment Plant	1,600,000
Castletown Sewerage Improvement	200,000
Calverstown Sewerage Improvement	100,000
Derrinturn Sewerage Improvement	300,000
Kilcock Water Improvement	30,000
Kilcullen Sewerage Extension	79,000
Kildare/Rathangan Sewerage	240,000
Kill Sewerage Improvement	100,000
Maynooth Pumping Station Improvements	150,000
Morristown/ Newbridge Sewerage Improvements	200,000
Prosperous Water Improvement	637,377

[990]

141. Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the amount allocated to each county council for 1999 under the local improvement scheme grant. [10367/99]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): The information requested is set out in the following table.

Local Improvements Scheme

Grant Allocations 1999

County Council	1999 Allocation£
Carlow	68,700
Cavan	455,100
Clare	211,300
Cork	223,500
Donegal	577,900
Fingal	24,400
Galway	381,200
Kerry	518,200
Kildare	62,900
Kilkenny	74,800
Laois	76,400
Leitrim	374,500
Limerick	80,700
Longford	144,000
Louth	67,400
Mayo	497,500
Meath	61,900
Monaghan	241,300
Offaly	71,700
Roscommon	137,300
Sligo	201,000
Tipp. N.R.	78,700
Tipp. S.R.	61,400
Waterford	72,200
Westmeath	68,400
Wexford	79,800
Wicklow	87,800
Total	5,000,000

142. Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if his Department will provide funding in 1999 to Cork County Council for a new sewerage system in Ballylicky, Bantry; and if the plans for this system were submitted to his Department by Cork County Council. [10368/99]

143. Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if his Department will provide funding to Cork County Council in 1999 for a new sewerage system in Schull, County Cork; and if the plans for this system were submitted to his Department by Cork County Council. [10369/99]

[991]

144. Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if his Department will provide funding to Cork County Council in 1999 for a new sewerage system in Castletownbere; and if the plans for this system were submitted to his Department by Cork County Council. [10370/99]

145. Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if his Department will provide funding to Cork County Council in 1999 for a new sewerage system in Skibbereen; and if the plans for this system were submitted to his Department by Cork County Council. [10371/99]

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey): I propose to take Questions Nos. 142 to 145, inclusive, together.

Preliminary reports for the Ballylickey and Skibbereen sewerage schemes, a brief for the Schull sewerage scheme and contract documents for the Castletownbere sewerage scheme have been received in my Department but have not been approved. As the schemes are not included in the 1999 water and sewerage services investment programme they come within the terms of my Department's circular letter L9/98 of 22 October 1998. The circular asked each local authority to undertake a fresh assessment of the needs for capital works in its area and to prepare a prioritised list of projects based on the assessment. The priority list will be taken into consideration by my Department in framing future water and sewerage services investment programmes under the next national development plan 2000-2006.

146. Mr. Neville asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if he will give details of the commencement and contracts for MOT testing. [10375/99]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): Following an international competitive tendering process to establish and operate a national car testing system, a contract was signed on 15 December 1998 with the National Car Testing Service Ltd., a fully-owned subsidiary of SGS Ireland Ltd. Testing will commence on 4 January 2000, with all pre-1992 cars being tested next year, followed by all 1992-1996 cars in 2001. Cars registered in 1997 and 1998 will be tested for the first time in 2002, alongside those already tested in 2000. Thereafter, every car four years and older will be liable for a test every two years.

147. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if his Department has received an application from Cork County Council regarding the allocation of funding to carry out improvement works to Fota Road, Cobh, County Cork; the amount involved; his views and decision on the matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10398/99]

[992]Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey): Cork County Council submitted 27 applications to my Department for consideration under the EU co-financed scheme of grants in 1999. These applications included an application for funding of £145,000 for the R624 Cobh Road. This application, together with all other applications under the EU co-financed scheme was considered in my Department, having regard to compliance with EU eligibility criteria, the need to prioritise projects, competing demands from other local authorities and the funds available for the scheme in 1999.

In the event this project was not among Cork County Council's seven projects selected for funding totalling £2,470,000 in 1999 under this scheme.

148. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10414/99]

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey): Agencies under the aegis of my Department are reporting progress with their remedial programmes to the Department every two months. It is clear from the latest reports submitted that detailed remedial programmes are in place and that substantial progress is now being made with those programmes.

The following agencies have now declared themselves Year 2000 compliant: Dublin Docklands Development authority, Housing Finance Agency, National Safety Council, Temple Bar Properties, Fire Services Council and the Rent Tribunal.

The schedule for compliance of the remaining agencies is as follows. An Comhairle Leabharlanna and the National Building Agency are scheduled for compliance by the end of April; An Bord Pleanala, the Local Government Management Services Board and the Medical Bureau of Road Safety are scheduled for compliance by end of June; and the National Roads Authority has scheduled its Year 2000 remedial programme for completion by September and both the Local Government Computer Services Board and the Environmental Protection Agency are scheduled for compliance by October 1999.

My Department will continue to monitor progress in these bodies and will provide whatever assistance it can to ensure that compliance is achieved within the required time scales.

[993]

149. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if a copy of the consultancy report dealing with traffic management in Dublin and the traffic warden service, which was finalised after the appointment of a director of traffic for Dublin, will be made available. [10453/99]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): I am arranging for a copy of the relevant report to be sent to the Deputy. The report was completed in November 1996, some time before the appointment of a director of traffic, Dublin Corporation, in March 1997.

150. Mr. Haughey asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the plans, if any, he has to introduce a new local authority sales scheme similar to the 1988 Dublin millennium scheme; if so, if the house prices will be at a similar level to 1988; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10454/99]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): I have no such proposals.

151. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government if Mayo County Council has submitted its prioritised list of projects for capital works under the water and sewerage investment programme for the next National Development Plan 2000-6; and, if so, each project listed as priority in the relevant listing position, in particular the priority allocated to improvements on the Westport water supply scheme. [10512/99]

Minister for the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Dempsey): My Department issued circular L9/98 to all sanitary authorities on 22 October 1998 inviting them to prepare an assessment of needs and a prioritised list of capital projects for water and waste water infrastructure over the period of the next National Development Plan 2000-6 and the 20 year period commencing in 2000. Initial drafts of the needs assessments are to be submitted to my Department by 23 April 1999 to provide further input to the preparation of the National Development Plan. The final needs assessments, which will be updated by sanitary authorities every five years, are to be formally submitted to my Department by the end of June this year following a full consultation process. No submission has yet been received from Mayo County Council.

[994]

152. Ms Clune asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the plans, if any, he has to introduce or facilitate the introduction of a dedicated transport service for the disabled; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10513/99]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): The concept of a category of taxi which could meet the needs of people who use wheelchairs was introduced through the Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations, 1992. Under these and subsequent regulations, local authorities are responsible for determining the number of taxi, including wheelchair accessible taxi, licences which may be granted, for monitoring the adequacy of the taxi service in their areas and for deciding on action to ensure that the demand for these services is adequately met. A considerable number of licences for wheelchair accessible taxis has now been issued in the Dublin area. Responsibility for public transport more generally rests with the Minister for Public Enterprise.

153. Ms Clune asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government the procedures, if any, in place to monitor the effectiveness of wheelchair accessible taxis in terms of the service they deliver to those with disabilities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10514/99]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government (Mr. Molloy): The operation and licensing of wheelchair accessible taxis, taxis, hackneys and their drivers is provided for under the Road Traffic (Public Service Vehicles) Regulations 1963 to 1999. Under these regulations local authorities are responsible for determining the number of taxi licences and wheelchair accessible taxi licences which may be granted, for monitoring the adequacy of the taxi service in their areas and for deciding on action to ensure that the demand for these services is adequately met.

The Dublin Taxi Forum addressed a comprehensive set of recommendations to a range of agencies including Government Departments, the Garda, local authorities and taxi service providers. The forum recommended a continuation of the policy whereby all new taxi licences issued in Dublin are wheelchair accessible. The forum also underlined the need for better marketing and organisation of taxi services generally, with the focus on consumer needs. It will be principally for the taxi industry to develop specific responses to this requirement, with the assistance as necessary of statutory agencies and other business interests. Among the specific forum recommendations addressed to taxi interests was a recommendation that a consumer focus panel be established with customer charter and complaints procedure and [995] training for existing and new entrants to the business.

I am currently seeking to progress, with the various interests concerned, a range of improvements to the regulatory framework for taxis and hackneys, following closely the advice addressed to the Minister for the Environment and Local Government by the Dublin Taxi Forum. I consider, however, that active and customer friendly marketing of services, including those for disabled persons, must be primarily promoted by the service industry itself.

155. Mr. Neville asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs when arrears of contributory old age pension will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. [10390/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The person concerned was recently awarded a reduced rate old age (contributory) pension with effect from the Friday following his 66 birthday. Arrangements have now been made for the payment of all arrears due to him, less the amount of old age (non-contributory) pension already paid to him. The cheque will be issued in the near future.

156. Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the brief given to the working group on carers; the principal objective of the carer's allowance scheme; the other supports, if any, in place to achieve this objective; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10393/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The terms of reference for the working group on the review of the carer's allowance were as follows: to examine and report on the carer's allowance scheme with a view to identifying its objectives, having regard to both the needs of the carer and the care recipient; considering the extent to which these objectives remain valid and compatible with the mission and current strategy of the Department. This included examining the current qualifying criteria and the controls, to ensure the scheme is operating effectively; evaluating the extent to which these objectives have been achieved, having due regard to the views of both the carers themselves and all other interested parties, e.g. the Department of Health and Children, health boards, pensions/insurance industry etc. and establishing the level and trend of the cost, staffing and other resources associated with the carer's allowance scheme; defining the outputs associated with the scheme activity and identifying the level and trend of those outputs, having due regard to the future implications of demographic, social and [996] economic changes in both the carer and care recipient groups; commenting on how efficiently and effectively the scheme has achieved its objectives, using other OECD countries for comparison purposes; evaluating the degree to which the objectives warrant the allocation of public resources on a current and ongoing basis, and if so, whether the current allocation is appropriate; examining the scope for alternative policy and/or organisational approaches to achieving the objectives on a more efficient and effective basis. Alternatives to be examined included a contributory social welfare benefit arrangement, other private sector arrangements and use of tax relief; and specifying suitable performance indicators which can be used to monitor and evaluate the scheme in the future.

The group considered that there were three main objectives of the allowance which can be described as follows: to provide income support to full-time carers on low incomes; to maintain people in the community; and to recognise and support the valuable role of carers. Following a detailed examination of the review, which was published in October 1998, and its proposals on the improvement and development of the carer's allowance, I introduced a range of measures in the 1999 budget to improve and develop the position of carers. Over 11,500 existing carers will benefit from the measures I have introduced while an additional 3,300 new carers will now qualify for a carer's allowance.

This budget package, costing over £18 million, represents a 40 per cent increase on existing expenditure and is a very considerable addition to the £45 million spent on carers in 1998. In addition, the rate of the carer's allowance will increase in June this year by £3 per week for recipients of the allowance who are under age 66 and by £6 per week for those who are over age 66. This represents an increase of 4.1 per cent and 7.9 per cent, respectively, on current rates.

Other measures proposed in the review which will be advanced this year include the introduction of a needs assessment, encompassing both the needs of the care recipient and the carers. This would separate care needs from income support and could be used by all State organisations which provide reliefs or grants to those in need of care. A working group, chaired by Dr. Tom Moffatt, Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, and also comprising representatives from my Department, the health boards and the voluntary groups has been set up to advance this proposal.

The review proposed the introduction of a PRSI carer's benefit to facilitate carers in employment to temporarily leave work to care. This proposal, at a cost £42 million, deserves further full examination and I would, for example, be interested in the views of the social partners in this regard. The review envisaged that this would be financed through the PRSI system. The proposal could, for example, be financed by an increase of the order of 0.1 to 0.2 percentage [997] points in each of the current employee and employer PRSI rates depending on the level of the Exchequer contribution.

Looking towards the longer term, a further PRSI benefit arrangement for care recipients i.e. those in need of care was also proposed in the review. Given that there is a high probability that many of us will need some form of long-term care, such an arrangement could enable care recipients to meet some or all of the costs of their own care. The Government agreed, given the complexity of the issues raised, that this proposal should be pursued at both the policy and operational levels as a separate consultancy project and my Department will be progressing this later this year.

The measures I have introduced in the budget and the additional proposals outlined above clearly indicate my personal commitment and that of the Government to carers, who enable people in need of care to be looked after in their own homes and communities, and the appreciation we must all have for this valuable role in our society. In addition, I should also say that my colleagues the Minister for Finance, the Minister for Health and Children and the Minister for Environment and Local Government have also brought forward proposals of assistance to carers. The Government is conscious that such a cross-cutting approach is required.

157. Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the number of people eligible for free travel; the percentage of those eligible which use the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10394/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The free travel scheme is available to all people living in the State aged 66 years, or over, to certain incapacitated persons under that age, to all carers in receipt of carer's allowance, and to persons receiving incapacity pensions or benefits from other EU countries. In addition, free travel is available to certain widows and widowers aged between 60 and 65 years of age whose late spouses formerly held a free travel pass.

Free travel enables recipients to use public transport and a large number of private bus and ferry services, free of charge. A spouse or partner may also travel free when accompanying the holder of a free travel pass.

At the end of December 1998, 532,838 persons held free travel passes of which approximately 134,000 relate to persons under the age of 66. Data on the level of take up and the frequency of use of free travel passes is not available.

The following table shows the number of recipients of free travel by type of payment received at December 1998.

[998]

Type of payment	Free Travel
Old Age (Contributory) Pension	66,556
Old Age (Non-Contributory) Pension	93,565
Retirement Pension	65,310
Widow/er's (Contributory) Pension	61,143
Widow/er's (Non-Contributory) Pension	14,970
Invalidity Pension	32,036
Garda Widow's Pension	1,349
Disability Allowance	55,544
British Pension	5,497
Others	136,868
Total	532,838

158. Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the new powers given to social welfare inspectors in the Social Welfare Bill; the feedback to date on the Garda and social welfare road checks; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10395/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Social Welfare Act, 1999, contains two significant provisions in relation to the work of social welfare inspectors.

The first provision relates to the powers of inspectors in regard to inspections of employer records. It amplifies existing powers and provides that an inspector may, during the course of investigation, remove from an employer's premises, or secure for later inspection any documents or records. It also requires an employer to provide reasonable explanations of any facts in relation to the contents of any such documents produced for examination by an inspector.

The second provision concerns powers appropriate to the participation by inspectors in multi-agency vehicle checkpoints. In essence, provision has been made whereby an inspector, when accompanied by a member of the Garda Síochána, may stop any vehicle which is suspected of being used in the course of employment or self-employment and question the occupants in relation to that matter.

This latter provision was included in this year's legislation in order to have a specific reference to a type of activity which had already been piloted in the context of multi-agency vehicle checkpoints carried out over the previous year or so. Participation in checkpoints by my Department's inspectors, at the invitation of the Garda Síochána, was carried out under the general powers of inspectors but it was considered that, as the pilot exercises were proving useful and, therefore, likely to continue in a on-going programme of controls, a special provision should be made in respect of them.

To date, 19 checkpoints have been carried out under the programme of multi-agency operations, involving the Garda, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the Department of Environment and Local Government, the Revenue Commissioners and my own Depart[999] ment. Their purpose is to facilitate checking of compliance with requirements set down in various Acts of the Oireachtas. Many instances of road traffic offences, vehicle defects, uses of illegal fuels, smuggling, tachograph offences, overloading and social welfare offences have been identified in the course of checking over 1,800 vehicles to date. In the case of social welfare compliance 118 fraudulent claims, mainly involving working and claiming unemployment payments, were discovered. In addition, a significant number of cases were noted for subsequent inspection or review.

160. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10415/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The agencies under the auspices of my Department consist of the Pensions Board, the Combat Poverty Agency and the National Social Services Board.

Each agency has carried out a formal Year 2000 compliance programme under the guidance of my Department. The Pensions Board and the Combat Poverty Agency achieved compliance by the end of March this year, while the National Social Services Board expects to be fully compliant by 1 May 1999.

161. Mr. Haughey asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if disability allowance will be to paid to persons with psychiatric illnesses who are hospitalised for long periods; the position in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10450/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities has recommended that people with disabilities in residential care should have the same entitlement to an income as a person living in the community. At the moment people receiving disability allowance, including people with mental health and emotional impairments, generally lose entitlement if they go into long-term residential care. Their maintenance costs and an element of pocket money are then met through funding from the health boards.

It is estimated that there are currently in the region of 5,300 people with disabilities in full-time residential care who are not in receipt of any social welfare payment. The full-year cost of pay[1000] ing disability allowance to this group would amount to some £25 million.

Since the take-over of the disability allowance scheme from the health boards, a number of measures have been introduced to progressively relax this disqualification. For instance, disability allowance continues to be paid for up to 13 weeks where the recipient goes into hospital. In addition, disability allowance is paid at half-rate in the case of those in part-time residential care. Where a person comes home for an extended holiday period, i.e. three weeks or more, disability allowance is paid for that period.

As part of the recent budget package, I announced another step in the direction of meeting the commission's recommendation. With effect from 1 August 1999, existing recipients of disability allowance, who are currently living at home, will be able to retain their entitlement to the allowance where they go into hospital or residential care. However, this will not apply to people who will already have lost entitlement to disability allowance, having entered residential care before 1 August 1999.

While the improvements in the residency conditions for entitlement to disability allowance which have already been introduced are of benefit to many people with disabilities, it is nevertheless recognised that more needs to be done. In this regard, the potential for further enhancements to the system will continue to be examined in the light of the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities and having regard to available resources.

162. Ms Clune asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the plans, if any, he has to increase the amount of rent allowance paid by health boards towards the cost of rent in view of the continuing increases in rents charged by landlords; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10527/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The supplementary welfare allowance – SWA – scheme provides for a weekly or monthly supplement to be paid in respect of rent to any person in the State whose means are insufficient to meet their needs.

The purpose of rent supplements is to assist with reasonable accommodation costs of eligible persons living in private rented accommodation who are unable to provide for their accommodation costs from their own resources and who do not have accommodation available to them from another source.

Rent supplements are normally calculated to ensure that the person, after the payment of rent has an income equal to the SWA basic weekly payment rate, less £6. This £6 represents the minimum contribution which recipients are required to pay from their own resources.

Each health board is required to set reasonable maximum rent levels for various household types [1001] as a basis for calculating the maximum amount of rent supplement payable in each area under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. The limits are set using local knowledge as to what constitutes a reasonable rent for private rented accommodation for various household types within and across the health board area.

The limits in all health board areas take into account information received from local auctioneers and letting agents regarding average rents charged in the area.

These maximum rent levels are reviewed regularly by the boards to take account of the actual fluctuations in accommodation costs observed in each area. When accommodation is no longer available within these limits, rent levels are reviewed and revised upwards, at the initiative of the health boards, in the light of their experience in dealing with claims for rent supplement.

Health boards must also satisfy themselves that accommodation is generally available within the limits which they set. In the circumstances, I have no plans to change the arrangements which current apply in this area at this time.

If any tenant is experiencing difficulties, the health boards have discretion to award a supplement based on an amount of rent which exceeds the maximum level set where there are extenuating medical or social circumstances having regard to the applicant's means and all the other requirements of the legislation.

163. Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will extend the free fuel scheme of 1 May 1999 in view of low temperatures being experienced at present; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10529/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The aim of the national fuel scheme is to assist householders who are on long-term social welfare or health board payments and who are unable to provide for their own heating needs. A payment of £5 per week – £8 per week in smokeless zones – is paid to eligible households for 26 weeks from mid-October to mid-April, regardless of the temperature. As a consequence, there may be a small number of occasions when the allowance is not paid even though temperatures are unseasonably low and equally, the allowance is paid at times when temperatures are not low.

Extending the fuel season to 1 May 1999 would cost an estimated £6 million and could only be considered in a budgetary context.

There is a facility available through the supplementary welfare allowance scheme to assist people in certain circumstances who have special heating needs at any time of the year. This operates in addition to the national fuel scheme. Under the SWA scheme, a person who has exceptional heating costs due to ill health or infirmity may qualify for a heating supplement. This can be paid as a weekly supplement in addition to [1002] other social welfare payments. An application for a heating supplement may be made by contacting the community welfare officer at the local health centre.

Where a person would not normally qualify for a heating supplement there is also provision under the SWA scheme to pay an exceptional needs payment (ENP).

The purpose of ENPs is to help prevent hardship by providing for essential, once-off, exceptional expenditure, which applicants could not reasonably be expected to meet out of their weekly income. ENPs are payable at the discretion of the health board taking into account the requirements of the legislation and all the relevant circumstances of the case.

164. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the contribution conditions, with particular reference to pre-1953 contributions, for each social welfare pension; the rational behind these conditions; the changes made to the conditions in recent years and the rational for those changes; the plans, if any, he has to change the current conditions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10548/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): To qualify for old age (contributory) or retirement pension, a person must have entered insurance at least ten years before pension age; have at least 156 contributions paid (from April 2002, this will increase to a minimum of 260 paid contributions and to a minimum of 520 from April 2012), and have a yearly average of at least 20 contributions (or 24 in the case of a retirement pension) registered since January 1953 (when the unified system of social insurance came into effect), or the time they commenced insurable employment, if later.

In November 1997 this minimum yearly average requirement was reduced from 20 to ten contributions per year, leading to a pro-rata pension. Where a person has a yearly average of between ten to 14 contributions, they are entitled to a pension rate at 50 per cent of the standard maximum rate while those with averages of between 15 to 19 receive a pension rate equivalent to 75 per cent of the standard maximum rate.

In recognition of their special circumstances, the qualifying conditions for the widow(er)'s (contributory) pension are more flexible than those outlined above.

Prior to 1953, three different types of contributions were payable – national health insurance, widow's and orphan's pension and unemployment insurance contributions – which gave specific entitlement only to the benefits of the schemes under which they were paid. Pre-1953 contributions can be taken into account for old age (contributory) pension purposes in satisfying the first two conditions set out above. [1003] They cannot be used in calculating the yearly average condition.

It has been acknowledged that the application of the “yearly average” rule can lead to particular difficulties for people who, for one reason or another, have 'gaps' in their insurance records leading to a diluted yearly average. Over the past decade, therefore, measures have been introduced to alleviate the impact of this rule including the following: the 1999 Social Welfare Act provides for special arrangements for self-employed people, aged 56 or over in April 1988 (when compulsory social insurance for the self-employed was introduced) and who have at least five years contributions paid since then. This pension will be paid at a flat-rate of 50 per cent of the standard maximum rate; in November 1997 the yearly average was reduced to ten contributions, as set out above; homemaker provisions were introduced in 1994 to cater for periods of time spent outside the workforce caring either for children or incapacitated people; pro rata pensions for people with “mixed insurance” records were introduced in 1991, the rate payable being in proportion to the periods of insurance completed at the rate appropriate for old age/retirement pensions; and in 1988, the creation of a special partial pension for those people whose earnings exceeded the insurable limit prior to its abolition in 1974 and who have a yearly average of at least five.

I am committed to ensuring that contributory pension coverage is available to as many categories as possible. With this in mind, and as already indicated in my Social Welfare Bill speech, a detailed review is now under way by the Department of all the contribution conditions generally applying to the old age (contributory) and retirement pensions, with particular reference to the possibility of using contributions paid prior to 1953.

Given the many complex issues involved in this, I consider it important that the views of older people are taken into account. Therefore, a consultative process with the main groups representing the interests of older people will take place shortly.

As I have previously indicated, I will report to the House on the outcome of the review which will, in the normal course, be publicly available when it has been considered by the Government. It is now expected that the review will be completed by mid-1999.

165. Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he will apply the retention of secondary benefits in a case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11. [10550/99]

[1004]Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): A person living in private rented accommodation who is receiving a social welfare payment may, in addition, receive a rent supplement under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. The person may retain the rent supplement while participating on a community employment scheme. However, if she takes up permanent employment her entitlement to rent supplement becomes subject to a means assessment.

The person concerned has been in receipt of a one-parent family payment for a number of years and she was also receiving a rent supplement payment. She participated on a community enterprise scheme and she retained her rent supplement while on the scheme. When she subsequently took up employment her entitlement to rent supplement was reassessed. Her income from her OPF payment and her earnings exceed the limit for entitlement to rent supplement. There are no arrangements for the retention of rent supplement in such cases.

166. Mr. McGrath asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs when workers on FÁS schemes commenced paying a full PRSI contribution; the benefits associated with these contributions; if workers registered with NRB and NTDI on training schemes and placements make the same contribution; if not, why not; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10551/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The community employment programme is operated by FÁS and offers a number of options to certain unemployed persons, lone parents and those referred by the National Rehabilitation Board, NRB, to take up employment with a sponsor for one to three years. The Social Welfare Act, 1996, provided for the introduction of Class A PRSI cover to new community employment workers with effect from 6 April 1996. As an exceptional measure, existing community employment workers were given until 30 April 1996, to opt for Class A if they so wished. PRSI Class A provides cover for the full range of social insurance benefits.

In addition to community employment, FÁS operates a wide range of training courses designed to enhance opportunities to enter or return to the workforce. Participants on these training courses are insurable at PRSI Class J and are covered for occupational injuries benefits only. However, participants meet the normal conditions for award of credited contributions are awarded a Class A social insurance credit in respect of the periods spent on these courses.

The NRB is a statutory agency which identifies and advises on the needs of persons with disabilities and the policies and services required to meet these needs. The NRB, amongst other functions, assesses the needs of persons with disabilities, [1005] provides an occupational guidance service and directs people to specialised training or employment options. The NRB does not directly provide training programmes or employment. It does, however, provide supports to employers, designed to encourage the employment of persons with disabilities, under the employment support scheme and the pilot programme for the employment of people with disabilities. Employees with disabilities who are recruited by employers in receipt of these supports pay PRSI on the same basis as employees generally and are covered for the full range of social insurance benefits.

The National Training and Development Institute, NTDI, provides assessment, guidance, training and education programmes leading to recognised certification and job placement services. The programmes and services are specifically designed for persons with disabilities. Participants on the training courses provided by the NTDI retain entitlement to social welfare payments and are not remunerated by that organisation. Accordingly, these participants, where already eligible, continue to receive a credited social insurance contribution, for the duration of these courses.

In line with the views of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, the establishment group for the National Disability Authority and Disability Support Service recommended that responsibility for vocational training and sheltered and supported employment should transfer from the Department of Health and Children and the NRB to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and FÁS. The Government has accepted these recommendations and the necessary arrangements required for the transfer of the relevant staff and assets of the NRB to FÁS are currently under way.

167. Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if the case will be examined for a person (details supplied) in County Waterford who was granted only a reduced payment of supplementary welfare allowance while attending a private treatment centre; if he will allow full payment of this allowance in these circumstances to avoid undue financial hardship and anxiety during the recovery period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10557/99]

Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern): The supplementary welfare allowance, SWA, scheme provides entitlement to any person in the State whose means are insufficient to meet their needs. The scheme is administered by the health boards on behalf of my Department.

A basic weekly payment of SWA is payable to persons who do not satisfy the conditions for entitlement to a social insurance or social assistance payment and as an interim payment to [1006] people who are awaiting a decision on a claim for any such payment.

In the case of persons who have applied for a social welfare or health board payment because of illness and who are hospitalised, the processing of this payment can continue and payment made to the person while in hospital.

The full basic rate of SWA is not payable to a person while in hospital as their basic needs are being provided in the hospital by the Department of Health and Children. However, in recognition of their need for toiletries, newspapers and so on, an allowance known as a comfort allowance can be paid by the health board under the SWA scheme to people who have no income or means while in hospital.

In the case raised by the Deputy, the person concerned was in receipt of the rate basic personal rate of SWA, £68.40 per week, from 10 September 1998 until 14 October 1998 from her local health centre.

She became a patient in a treatment centre on 7 October 1998 and sometime later made an application for SWA at the adjacent health centre. This was initially refused and after she was discharged on 19 November she appealed this decision. In the meantime, she was again awarded full SWA of £68.40 from her local health centre, with effect from 19 November 1998.

The appeal, heard in January 1999, was successful and the person concerned was awarded SWA at the rate of £11.80 per week in respect of the time she spent in the treatment centre.

However, on 15 December 1998 she had submitted medical certificates to my Department's disability benefit section and was awarded disability benefit at the graduated rate of £31.60 per week, backdated to 6 October 1998. As this is more beneficial to her than £11.80 per week SWA, she is not eligible for any SWA payment in respect of that period.

Arrears of disability benefit, taking account of the amount of SWA paid after 6 October 1998, have been paid to the person concerned. This included arrears of £31.60 per week in respect of the time she spent in the treatment centre.

The person concerned is currently in receipt of a total of £68.40 per week, consisting of £31.60 disability benefit and £36.80 supplementary welfare allowance.

168. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands the agencies under the auspices of her Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when she expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10416/99]

Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Miss de Valera): The following bodies under the auspices of my Department have already declared themselves to be Year 2000 [1007] compliant: the National Gallery, the National Archives, Bord Leabhar na Gaeilge, the National Library, the Irish Film Board and the Irish Museum of Modern Art.

The bodies which expect to be compliant by the end of July 1999 are the National Concert Hall, the Heritage Council and the Arts Council.

The remaining bodies, namely, Údarás na Gaeltachta, the National Museum, Bord na Gaeilge, the Chester Beatty Library, Radio Telefís Éireann, the Independent Radio and Television Commission, An Cumann Náisiúnta Amharclinne and the Irish Manuscripts Commission all expect to be compliant by 30 September 1999.

169. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands if an official from the National Parks and Wildlife Service will call to a person (details supplied) in County Mayo to verify if the new regulations for turf cutting affect him; and if his land has been designated as a national heritage area and special area of conservation. [10506/99]

Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Miss de Valera): The person referred to by the Deputy should contact the deputy regional manager of Dúchas (Mr. Michael Sweeney, Kilmaine Road, Ballinrobe, Co Mayo, Tel: 092 41269) and supply a copy of a map of the lands in question, so that every assistance can be given in determining the designation status of those lands and the extent, if any, to which the turf cutting regulations may apply.

170. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands the progress made in relation to the proposed Ardmore protocol proposed to her Department on the proper protection of animals used in film making; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10507/99]

Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (Miss de Valera): Since October 1998 it is a condition of certificates issued under section 481 of the Taxes Consolidation Act, 1997, that animals, if figuring in the production of a film, be in the care of experienced handlers, both in training and during filming, and be treated and managed humanely at all times.

[1008]

171. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number and location of traffic wardens, if any, employed by his Department; the job description for traffic wardens; the plans, if any, he has to re-deploy these traffic wardens to local authority control; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10397/99]

181. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will defer the transfer from his Department of Dublin's traffic wardens, due to take place on 29 April 1999, in view of the fact that the transfer has not been agreed by the wardens and Dublin Corporation has made it clear that it is its intention to radically scale down the traffic warden service; and if more time for discussion will be allowed. [10543/99]

182. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if a memorandum on which a Government decision, and the text of that decision, on the transfer of responsibility for traffic in Dublin to Dublin Corporation was based will be made available. [10544/99]

184. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason it is proposed that 146 trained uniformed Garda civilian personnel, for example traffic wardens in Dublin, be transferred to Dublin Corporation which has stated that it will radically scale down the traffic warden service in view of the National Crime Forum which refers to relatively few civilian staff being employed to free gardaí from non-police functions. [10546/99]

185. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason he has not made an offer of adequate compensation to the traffic wardens for loss of their office as authorised persons under section 103 of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, in view of the stated intention of Dublin Corporation to encourage as many redundancies as possible among the traffic wardens whom it is proposed to transfer from the Department to the Corporation. [10547/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): I propose to take Questions Nos. 171, 181, 182, 184 and 185 together.

Traffic wardens in the Dublin metropolitan area are employed by the Garda Commissioner and their number and location are set out in the following tabular statement.

The duties of a traffic warden include, amongst other duties which may be assigned to them by the Garda Commissioner, patrolling any area assigned to them and to issue ‘fine on the spot' notices for offences under the Road Traffic Acts, 1961, as amended which relate to the prohibition or restriction or the stopping or parking of mechanically propelled vehicles, offences under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1976 which relate to the non-display of current (licence) disc, any other offences which may be declared by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government to be subject to fines on the spot.

At the outset, I should state that the transfer of [1009] the traffic warden service to Dublin Corporation which is due to take place on 29 April 1999 will give effect to the Government decision of 26 July 1995, which gives responsibility for traffic management in Dublin to Dublin Corporation. This was recommended to the previous Government by the then Minister for the Environment as part of the Dublin transportation initiative plan.

The question of making available the memorandum and the Government decision to the Deputy is a matter for any colleague the Minister for the Environment and Local Government and not a matter for my Department. I should add, however, that Government decisions and memoranda are confidential to the Government.

All 144 traffic wardens, currently employed by the Garda Commissioner are being transferred to the corporation. They are State industrial employees and can, therefore, be transferred within the public sector. The traffic wardens are being transferred with the functions they discharge to a local authority, i.e. Dublin Corporation. I might add that this transfer will bring the Dublin metropolitan area into line with the rest of the State whereby local authorities employ traffic wardens under the Local Government (Traffic Wardens) Act, 1975.

All traffic wardens were notified by the Garda Commissioner earlier this month that they will transfer to Dublin Corporation on 29 April 1999, thus implementing in full the previous Government's decision in so far as the traffic services are concerned. It is my intention that this date is adhered to.

Prolonged and extensive negotiations between my Department, the Department of Finance, Dublin Corporation and the unions have already taken place. A joint offer by the Garda Commissioner and Dublin Corporation under the PCW pay agreement was made to both unions last December which offers the traffic wardens on their transfer enhanced pay and conditions over and above what they currently enjoy. Earlier today the unions sought further clarification on a number of issues which are primarily matters for Dublin Corporation and a meeting is being arranged over the coming days to deal with this.

The Deputies will appreciate that the terms and conditions of the employment of the traffic wardens with Dublin Corporation, including the issue of any potential voluntary redundancies, are solely matters for the corporation as their future employer. There is no question of compensation being paid to traffic wardens on transfer. I also [1010] wish to emphasise that the PCW proposals offer the traffic wardens enhanced pay and conditions over and above what they presently enjoy.

Garda Station	Number of Traffic Wardens
Blackrock	4
Balbriggan	1
Blanchardstown	1
Clondalkin	2
Clontarf	5
Donnybrook	6
Dún Laoghaire	7
Dundrum	4
Finglas	2
Fitzgibbon Street	31
Kevin Street	13
Pearse Street	41
Parking Fines Office	14
Malahide	2
Rathfarnham	2
Rathmines	4
Swords	1
Tallaght	1
Terenure	3
Total	144

172. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10417/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): I refer the Deputy to the two comprehensive answers on this matter which I gave to Parliamentary Question No. 368 on 15 December 1998 and Parliamentary Questions Nos. 540, 541, 544, 545 and 546, which were taken together on 23 March 1999.

I am satisfied that both my Department and the associated offices-agencies under the aegis of my Department have a detailed programme of work in place to prepare for Year 2000 compliance and that every effort is being made to ensure that compliance is achieved.

That being said, the following associated agencies have been declared year 2000 compliant, the office of Charitable Donations and Bequests, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal, the office of the Censorship of Publications, and the Victims Commission.

The following are the expected compliance dates for the other agencies coming under my Department:

An Garda Síochána – end September 1999

Land Registry & Registry of Deeds – end July 1999

Forensic Science Laboratory – end June 1999

Film Censor's Office – end May 1999

Data Protection Office – end April 1999

Garda Complaints Board – end April 1999

Legal Aid Board – end June 1999

Employment Equality Agency – end July 1999

Probation & Welfare Service – end June 1999

Criminal Assets Bureau – end April 1999.

[1011]

173. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the countries whose nationals can visit Ireland without being required to obtain a visa; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10437/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): The states whose nationals can visit Ireland without being required to obtain a visa are set out in the Aliens (Visas) Order, 1999 (S.I. No. 25 of 1999). These states are:

Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong (Special Administrative Region), Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Korea (Republic of South), Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraquay, Poland, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Tonga, Trinidad & Tobago, United States of America, United Kingdom & Colonies, Uruguay, Vatican City, Venezuela, Western Samoa, Zimbabwe.

174. Mr. Aylward asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the criteria applied by his Department to have a resident garda located in large towns; if a resident garda will be located in a large town (details supplied) in County Kilkenny where the population has increased over the past number of years, where there is an increase in crime and social problems and which is at present serviced, in effect, by gardaí from another county; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10442/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): I am not involved in the detailed allocation of Garda personnel to individual areas. This is a matter for the Garda authorities who have advised that the current personnel strength of the station referred to in the question is one garda and that the Garda Human Resource Allocation Model (GHRAM), which takes into account factors such as crime levels, population etc., is part of the criteria used in determining the allocation of Garda personnel to individual areas.

I understand from the Garda authorities that no member of the force can be compelled to reside in a particular area but the factors to be considered in allocating a residential garda to official accommodation in an area would obviously include the availability of suitable official accommodation and the willingness of the incumbent to reside therein. These criteria are incorporated in all circulars issued that are inviting applications to occupy vacancies in official accommodation.

I understand that the population of the sub-district where the town referred to in the question is situated is approximately 3,500, including the population of the town itself which is approximately 690. The Garda station in the town opens for two hours each day on which the member is [1012] detailed to work. When the station is unmanned there is a direct communication link with Thurles district headquarters.

I understand that the Garda authorities, in conjunction with the Office of Public Works, are at present seeking a suitable site for a proposed new Garda station in the town.

The recent crime figures pertaining to the town are as follows:

Year	Recorded	Detected	Detection Rate
1996	15	5	33%
1997	18	7	39%
1998	23	11	48%

*These figures are provisional.

While there has been an increase in recorded crime in the area, it must also be said that there has been a substantial increase in the detection rate.

The Garda authorities have also informed me that they are satisfied that the current policing arrangements in the town are adequate to meet the policing requirements of the area. There are no plans at present to allocate a residential garda to official accommodation in the station.

175. Mr. Yates asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to a proposal to his Department whereby parents of children who visit Ireland in summer 1999 and annually from Chernobyl would be allowed to come to the country with their children; if his Department is open to these applications for parents to stay here with their children for a specific and limited duration; the reason his Department rejected this; if it will be reconsidered; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10443/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): My Department operates a scheme whereby children travelling to Ireland under the aegis of established Chernobyl aid groups can apply to be exempted from the visa requirement. This unique arrangement was availed of by more than 2,500 children in 1998 and is justified by reference to their age and their exceptional personal humanitarian need for recuperation. I would not be in favour of extending this exemption to their parents.

I should point out that the only inquiry my Department has received recently along the lines referred to by the Deputy amounted to a proposal that such parents would come to Ireland for the summer and fund their costs by working without work permits for farmers picking fruit. I would not be in favour of approving visas under such circumstances.

It is of course open to any person to apply in the normal way for a visit visa provided they can satisfy my Department of their intention to return as well as their capacity to support themselves without working or requiring public funds.

[1013]

176. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of cases of rape which have been prosecuted in the courts in each of the years from 1995 to 1999. [10538/99]

177. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of cases of rape reported to the gardaí in each of the years from 1995 to 1999; the number prosecuted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10539/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): I propose to take Questions Nos. 176 and 177 together.

Crime statistics and information on the number of cases of rape of females reported and the number of cases in which prosecutions were commenced are published in the annual reports of An Garda Síochána, copies of which are available in the Oireachtas Library. The most recently published report is in respect of 1997.

While the statistics for 1998 have not yet been published, provisional statistics for that year indicate that 292 cases were reported or known by the Garda, of which 108 resulted in criminal proceedings being commenced. Comparable statistics for the current year are not yet available.

The figures for 1998 are provisional and subject to change as Garda investigations progress. The annual report of an Garda Síochána will contain the final figures in respect of 1998 when it is published later in the year.

178. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on whether there is a higher number of adjournments in cases of rape and sexual assaults than in other crimes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10540/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): Statistical information is not currently maintained which would indicate the average number of adjournments in criminal cases or suggest that there is a higher number of adjournments in cases of rape and sexual assault than in cases involving other crimes. The new IT system which is being introduced in the courts will enable the compilation of more detailed and relevant statistics on the type of business dealt with by the courts, including information on adjournments and deviations from the norm.

179. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when he intends to introduce new legislation to deal with the crimes of rape and sexual assault. [10541/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): The majority of submissions received in response to the discussion paper on the law on sexual offences published by my Department last year dealt with issues surrounding the establishment of a sex offenders register. That is why in February last I sought and obtained Government approval for the prep[1014] aration of legislative proposals for the introduction of such a register. This legislation will also deal with the issue of post-release supervision of sex offenders and separate legal representation in certain limited circumstances for complainants in rape and sexual assault cases. Two additional matters which I am examining for possible inclusion in the Bill are, first, the feasibility of a new civil court order against a sex offender whose behaviour in the community gives reasonable cause for concern that the order is necessary to protect the public from serious harm and, second, the possible creation of a new offence in connection with child sex offenders who seek employment, paid or unpaid, involving unsupervised access to children.

Preparation of the Bill is receiving a high priority in my Department. Once that Bill is finalised, consideration will be given to the question of what legislative proposals, if any, should ensue from the other issues, including issues relating to the crimes of rape and sexual assault raised in the discussion paper.

180. Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if the forms used for the processing of a civil divorce will be made available to the public as they are only available through solicitors. [10542/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): The forms to be used in processing applications for civil divorce are prescribed in the Rules of the Superior Courts (No.3), 1997, SI No. 343 of 1997 in respect of applications to the High Court and in the Rules of the Circuit Court (No. 1), 1997, SI No. 84 of 1997, in respect of applications to the Circuit Court. These rules may be purchased from the Government Publications Sales Office, Sun Alliance House, Molesworth Street, Dublin 2, or by mail order from Government Publications, Postal Trade Section, 4-5 Harcourt Road, Dublin 2.

183. Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason two traffic sergeants were seconded to training personnel of a private firm (details supplied) in parking control by-laws and court procedures in Dublin. [10545/99]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): The background to the issue referred to by the Deputy is the Government decision of 26 July 1995 whereby the Government agreed to the transfer of responsibility for the traffic services in Dublin city, including the tow-away services operated by the Garda Commissioner, to Dublin Corporation.

With regard to the “seconding” of two traffic sergeants to training personnel of a private firm, I am informed by the Garda authorities that this relates to the transfer of responsibility for the tow-away service, referred to above from the [1015] Garda Commissioner to Dublin Corporation. I understand the two sergeants attended a training programme and gave presentations on the practical problems likely to be encountered by employees of the firm referred to by the Deputy who carry out the towing of vehicles on behalf of the corporation. I have been assured by the Garda authorities that there was a minimum amount of Garda time involved which resulted in a smooth transfer of the towing function.

186. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation when he will respond to an application for grant aid from the national lottery fund submitted by a club (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10365/99]

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): An application for financial assistance under the new sports capital programme was received from the club in question. This is one of almost 1,900 applications and it will be considered when decisions on grant allocations for 1999 are being made, in accordance with the criteria for awarding such grants as outlined under the terms and conditions of the programme.

In view of the large number of applications received, and the level of work involved in evaluating them, I do not expect to be in a position to make final announcements on the 1999 round of allocations for some time.

187. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation the agencies under the auspices on his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10418/99]

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): My Department has established a year 2000 monitoring committee which includes representatives of the agencies under the auspices of my Department, viz. Bord Fáilte, CERT and Area Development Management Limited. The committee has informed me that it expects all the agencies will be year 2000 compliant by end July 1999 in accordance with criteria set by Government.

188. Mr. Farrelly asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if his Department has received an application for lottery funding from a club (details supplied) in County Meath; if so, the date received; if it will be considered in the 1999 allocations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10433/99]

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): An application for financial assist[1016] ance under the new sports capital programme was received from the club in question on Friday, 12 February 1999. This is one of almost 1,900 applications and it will be considered when decisions on grant allocations for 1999 are being made, in accordance with the criteria for awarding such grants as outlined under the terms and conditions of the programme.

In view of the large number of applications received and the level of work involved in evaluating them, I do not expect to be in a position to make final announcements on the 1999 round of allocations for some time.

189. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if funding has been reduced to the governing bodies of sports organisations in 1999; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10531/99]

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid): Allocations to national governing bodies of sport are decided on the basis of recommendations made to my Department by the Irish Sports Council which considers the applications in the first instance. The Council's recommendations are based on a close and detailed evaluation of applications received from each of the governing bodies and are made having regard to the criteria for grant approval outlined in my Department's section 15 and 16 reference book prepared under the Freedom of Information Act, 1997.

As I indicated in my reply to Parliamentary Question 501 on Tuesday, 20 April 1999 the position is that funding to the national governing bodies of sport for 1999 is not yet finalised as allocations under the international carding scheme in respect of high-performing sportspersons remain to be made. When these allocations have been finalised, it will then be possible to appreciate the full extent of funding to the national governing bodies in 1999.

190. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Education and Science the agencies under the auspices of his Department which have declared themselves to be year 2000 compliant; the agencies, if any, yet to make such a declaration; when he expects such a declaration, if any, to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10419/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): Year 2000 status reports are sought every two months by my Department from 61 bodies under its aegis. These reports provide self-assessments of progress towards year 2000 compliance.

To date, one body Gaisce, has declared itself to be year 2000 compliant. My Department is in the process of obtaining expected compliance dates for all of the other bodies.

[1017]

191. Mr. Haughey asked the Minister for Education and Science if his attention has been drawn to the huge increase in primary school children who wish to attend local schools in the Beaumont area, Dublin 9; if he has satisfied himself that St. Fiachra's junior school can deal with this; if class sizes will increase as a result; if children will have to wait an extra year to be admitted to junior infants as a result; the role of the Department in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10451/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): I am aware that the enrolment in St. Fiachra's junior national school has increased over the past few years. However, the school has not applied to my Department for additional classroom accommodation and has indicated that it has sufficient provision to meet the present demand for places.

I have significantly improved the staffing schedule, which determines staffing in national schools, for the 1999-2000 school year. As a result of this all schools will operate to a maximum class average of 30 pupils.

Generally enrolment policy is a matter for the board of management of a national school. St. Fiachra's national school has indicated that, as part of its enrolment policy, it enrols only pupils into junior infants each September who are four years of age by June of that year. The reason given is related to the immaturity of very young pupils rather than to accommodation problems.

192. Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education and Science if his attention has been drawn to a request from Bruce College, County Cork, to obtain an exemption whereby the schedule, which is not recognised for the payment by the State of teaching staff, could provide a centre where the junior certificate exam could be sat; the reason no decision has been issued in the case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10509/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): I am aware that Bruce College has made a request to enter candidates for the Junior Certificate Examination. I have already indicated to Bruce College that the issues in question are multi-faceted and complex and that any decision will have ramifications which are broader than Bruce College alone.

The matter is currently the subject of ongoing consideration within my Department.

193. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Education and Science if the needs of pupils in Stratford-on-Slaney national school for the services of a resource teacher will be fulfilled by a sharing arrangement among schools in the area as was the case with remedial teachers for the school. [10510/99]

[1018]Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): I understand that the school in question is currently preparing an application for a resource teacher to cater for a number of special needs children attending the school.

My Department's response to such an application will be based on the number of children involved and the nature of their special needs. The response may take the form of full-time or part-time resource teacher support or child care support, or both, depending on the particular needs involved.

Once details of the children in question have been received from the school, my Department will consider what additional supports are required to cater for the children in question.

194. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Education and Science the extra investment, if any, he plans to make in schools in order that there is further provision for sports activities for young boys and girls in view of the intention of his Department to make physical education an exam subject. [10532/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): It is the policy of my Department to provide physical education halls as part of the schedule of accommodation for all new post primary schools. A PE hall is also provided when a major extension to a school, which does not already have such a facility, is being built. In addition my Department has a programme for providing PE halls as stand alone projects at post-primary schools which do not already have this facility and a number of such projects have proceeded to construction within the past year.

The Deputy will be aware of a £9 million programme to provide community sportshalls attached to schools in drug task force areas. This is a joint programme between my Department, the Department of Social Community and Family Affairs and the Department of the Environment and Local Government.

A pilot project was established earlier this year to evaluate, in a school context, aspects of a new and revised junior cycle physical education syllabus which it is intended will be introduced into the school curriculum over the next few years. The project will explore issues relating to the resources necessary for introducing the new programme.

The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment is preparing a draft leaving certificate syllabus. it is my intention that the subject will be introduced into the leaving certificate curriculum in the school year 2001-02.

195. Ms Fitzgerald asked the Minister for Education and Science his policy on providing sports facilities in primary schools. [10533/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): My Department's current policy is to provide general-purpose rooms in new primary schools with four classrooms or more. In addition, a standard area of 100 square metres of paved [1019] play area per class unit is provided. A ball-court is included on the lay area and nets, posts and markings for basketball, netball and volleyball are eligible for grant-aid.

The specifications for general-purpose rooms and play areas are being examined at present as part of an overall review of planning data for primary schools.

196. Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason a person (details supplied) in Dublin 6W, who wrote to him on 14 February 1999 and faxed a copy of a letter to his Department approximately three weeks ago regarding the difficulties experienced by art teachers who attempted to qualify through the technical system of art teachers' training run by his Department until 1988, has not received an acknowledgment. [10556/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): The delay relates to certain difficulties encountered by the officers of my Department in formulating a comprehensive answer to the query raised in the letter. One of these is the fact that there are a number of categories of unqualified teacher who attempted to qualify through the TS, technical system, some have not passed the TS examinations, others have passed the TS but have not passed all three elements of the ATC, art teaching certificate.

To address this longstanding problem, it will be necessary to ascertain the number of teachers currently belonging to these two categories, the current status of their employment: TWT, EPT or part-time, and the exact qualifications of the teachers in question.

I know my Department is in the process of quantifying the above data. When this picture is clear, it will be possible to work on a solution to issues in question.

197. Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason a decision was taken to lower the security fence around the Oberstown Boys and Oberstown Girls centres in Lusk, County Dublin, when the community was informed that it would be 18 ft. in height; the person responsible for taking the decision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10571/99]

198. Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Education and Science the plans, if any, he has to expand the Oberstown Boys and Oberstown Girls centres in Lusk, County Dublin, to facilitate extra numbers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10572/99]

[1020]

199. Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Education and Science if his Department has taken a decision to rebuild the existing structures at Oberstown Boys and Oberstown Girls centres in Lusk, County Dublin; if the plans will be made available for viewing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10573/99]

200. Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Education and Science the amount which has been budgeted for the construction of an 18 ft. security fence around the Oberstown Boys and Oberstown Girls centres in Lusk, County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10574/99]

201. Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Education and Science the plans, if any, other than the security fence, which are going to be in place to enhance security at the Oberstown Boys and Oberstown Girls centres in Lusk, County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10575/99]

Minister for Education and Science (Mr. Martin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 197 to 201, inclusive, together.

No final decision has been taken regarding the height of the fence in question. Issues relating to the most appropriate height, location and nature of the fence are currently being reviewed by my Department in the light of recent expert advice and research into the effectiveness of such measures. The objective of the review is to ensure that any actions taken in this area will achieve the desired objective of enhancing security at the facilities and reassuring residents of the area, without resorting to unsightly and excessively intrusive security measures. In addition to the erection of a perimeter security fence, arrangements are being made for the introduction of securing lighting and access control at the entrance to the campus.

A campus development plan for the Lusk campus includes proposals for the phased replacement of the existing three units which comprise Oberstown Boys Centre with four new units and the development of improved security facilities to complement existing provision at Trinity House Reformatory School.

Funding amounting to £4.033 million is available in the current year to facilitate the erection of the security fence at Oberstown and to meet the cost of developments taking place at the Finglas children's centre. The actual cost of the security fence at Oberstown will be known when the tendering process has been completed.

The Deputy will appreciate the need for a degree of confidentiality in relation to measures which are of a security nature and are designed to contain young offenders who have been placed in the custody by the courts. However, within this limitation it is intended that local residents will be kept fully informed of developments. Lusk Community Council is already represented on the board of management of the facilities at Oberstown and as such is kept fully informed on an ongoing basis in relation to developments at the Oberstown campus.