3 o’clockPrelude
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Departmental Expenditure.
Interdepartmental Committees.
Priority Questions.
Social Welfare Fraud.
Child Support.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Departmental Staff.
Other Questions.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Combat Poverty Agency.
Adjournment Debate Matters.
Leaders’ Questions.
Requests to move Adjournment of Dáil under Standing Order 32.
Order of Business.
Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008: Order for Second Stage.
Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008: Second Stage.
Message from Select Committee.
Vaccination Programme: Motion.
Message from Select Committee.
Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed).
Adjournment Debate.
Job Creation.
Crime Levels.
Army Barracks Closures.
Written Answers.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Services for People with Disabilities.
Departmental Agencies.
Social Welfare Code.
Pension Provisions.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Departmental Expenditure.
Child Support.
Departmental Agencies.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Departmental Staff.
Fuel Poverty.
Social Welfare Benefits.
National Carers Strategy.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Child Support.
Pension Provisions.
Departmental Expenditure.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Social Welfare Code.
Pension Provisions.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Family Support Services.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Pension Provisions.
Child Support.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Insurance.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Telecommunications Services.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Pension Provisions.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Pension Provisions.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Attendance Management.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Departmental Staff.
Attendance Management.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Planning Issues.
Waste Management.
Departmental Transport.
Unemployment Levels.
Decentralisation Programme.
Job Protection.
Departmental Agencies.
Job Losses.
FÁS Training Programmes.
Proposed Legislation.
Departmental Expenditure.
FÁS Training Programmes.
Departmental Agencies.
FÁS Training Programmes.
Job Creation.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
FÁS Training Programmes.
Planning Issues.
Company Takeovers.
Waste Management.
Community Employment Schemes.
Departmental Transport.
Decentralisation Programme.
Tax Code.
Commemorative Events.
Tax Code.
Departmental Schemes.
National Parks.
Global Financial Crisis.
Financial Services Regulation.
Decentralisation Programme.
Tax Code.
Lottery Funding.
Tax Code.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Tax Code.
Tax Yield.
Departmental Expenditure.
Planning Issues.
Tax Code.
International Monetary Fund.
Computerisation Programme.
Banking Sector Regulation.
Tax Yield.
Departmental Transport.
Services for People with Disabilities.
Accident and Emergency Services.
Services for People with Disabilities.
Child Care Services.
Hospital Services.
Medical Cards.
Hospital Services.
Hospital Accommodation.
Medical Cards.
Hospital Services.
Health Repayment Scheme.
Health Services.
Departmental Expenditure.
Hospital Services.
Medical Cards.
Health Services.
Medical Cards.
Health Services.
Health Service Staff.
Medical Cards.
Health Services.
Health Service Staff.
Hospital Waiting Lists.
Health Services.
Drugs Payment Scheme.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Health Services.
Care of the Elderly.
Assisted Human Reproduction.
Mental Health Services.
Medical Cards.
Hospital Waiting Lists.
Health Service Staff.
Medicinal Products.
Planning Issues.
Health Services.
Hospitals Building Programme.
Medical Cards.
Health Service Staff.
Nursing Home Subventions.
Accident and Emergency Services.
Health Services.
Waste Management.
Pharmacy Regulations.
Hospital Staff.
Accident and Emergency Services.
Food Labelling.
Health Service Staff.
Departmental Transport.
Hospital Waiting Lists.
Departmental Investigations.
Child Care Services.
Long-term Illness Scheme.
Ambulance Service.
Drugs Payment Scheme.
National Centre for Medical Genetics.
Nursing Home Subventions.
Decentralisation Programme.
Air Services.
State Airports.
Parking Regulations.
Light Rail Project.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Bodies.
Marine Accidents.
Air Services.
State Airports.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Road Network.
Light Rail Project.
Planning Issues.
Public Transport.
Waste Management.
National Cycling Policy.
Sustainable Travel.
State Airports.
Decentralisation Programme.
Residency Permits.
State Airports.
Youth Services.
Closed Circuit Television Systems.
National Drugs Strategy.
Liquor Licensing Laws.
Private Security Authority.
Criminal Prosecutions.
Road Traffic Offences.
Organised Crime.
Firearms Licences.
Visa Applications.
Residency Permits.
Departmental Expenditure.
Citizenship Applications.
Community Alert Programme.
Crime Levels.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Visa Applications.
Human Rights Issues.
Prison Medical Service.
Garda Investigations.
Planning Issues.
Sentencing Policy.
Irish Film Classification Office.
Prison Visiting Committees.
Garda Vetting Services.
Crime Prevention.
Residency Permits.
Waste Management.
Prison Committals.
Departmental Transport.
Residency Permits.
Prison Accommodation.
International Agreements.
Public Order Offences.
Proposed Legislation.
Closed Circuit Television Systems.
Criminal Prosecutions.
Garda Strength.
Garda Deployment.
Garda Charter.
Human Rights Issues.
Drug Court Programme.
Prison Drug Treatment Services.
Criminal Prosecutions.
Judicial Studies Institute.
Criminal Prosecutions.
Courts Service.
Legal Costs.
Garda Operations.
Road Traffic Offences.
Garda Disciplinary Proceedings.
Decentralisation Programme.
Consular Services.
Human Rights Issues.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
EU Treaties.
International Agreements.
Planning Issues.
Waste Management.
Departmental Transport.
Decentralisation Programme.
Architecture Award.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Planning Issues.
Sports Capital Programme.
Waste Management.
Sport and Recreational Development.
Departmental Transport.
Decentralisation Programme.
Departmental Bodies.
National Drugs Strategy.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Planning Issues.
Road Network.
Water and Sewerage Schemes.
Rural Social Scheme.
Waste Management.
Scéim na mBóithre Áise.
Departmental Transport.
Decentralisation Programme.
Social Welfare Code.
Departmental Agencies.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Departmental Staff.
Departmental Expenditure.
Social Welfare Appeals.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Grant Payments.
Social Welfare Appeals.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Planning Issues.
Waste Management.
Departmental Transport.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Appeals.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Benefits.
Social Welfare Code.
Social Welfare Payments.
Social Welfare Code.
Decentralisation Programme.
Defence Forces Recruitment.
Naval Service Vessels.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Planning Issues.
Waste Management.
Departmental Transport.
Decentralisation Programme.
Local Authority Funding.
Appointments to State Boards.
Local Authority Staff.
Social and Affordable Housing.
Departmental Bodies.
Noise Pollution.
Departmental Expenditure.
Housing Grants.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Water and Sewerage Schemes.
Social and Affordable Housing.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
EU Treaties.
Waste Management.
Local Authority Housing.
Environmental Policy.
Water and Sewerage Schemes.
Planning Issues.
Water Quality.
Social and Affordable Housing.
Water and Sewerage Schemes.
Waste Management.
County Development Plan.
Planning Issues.
Departmental Transport.
Library Usage.
Water and Sewerage Schemes.
Building Regulations.
Planning Issues.
Waste Management.
Waste Disposal.
Aarhus Convention.
Decentralisation Programme.
Freedom of Information.
Departmental Expenditure.
Rail Network.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Post Office Network.
Telecommunications Services.
Planning Issues.
Site Remediation.
Broadcasting Services.
Fisheries Authority.
Waste Management.
Offshore Exploration.
Departmental Transport.
Decentralisation Programme.
Animal Feedstuffs.
Grant Payments.
Farm Retirement Scheme.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Bodies.
Grant Payments.
Bovine Disease Controls.
EU Directives.
Rural Development Programme.
Grant Payments.
Food Labelling.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Grant Payments.
Installation Aid Scheme.
Planning Issues.
Tuberculosis Incidence.
Grant Payments.
Waste Management.
Departmental Transport.
Grant Payments.
Installation Aid Scheme.
Grant Payments.
Decentralisation Programme.
School Accommodation.
Higher Education Grants.
Departmental Savings.
School Transport.
Educational Disadvantage.
Higher Education Grants.
Computerisation Programme.
Higher Education Sector.
School Inspections.
Special Educational Needs.
Higher Education Grants.
Departmental Expenditure.
Site Acquisitions.
Pension Provisions.
Higher Education Grants.
Residential Institutions Redress Scheme.
Special Educational Needs.
School Management.
Schools Amalgamation.
Departmental Expenditure.
Departmental Staff.
Schools Building Projects.
Higher Education Grants.
School Management.
Planning Issues.
Discrimination In Education.
Special Educational Needs.
School Staffing.
Waste Management.
Schools Refurbishment.
Traveller Education.
Special Educational Needs.
Third Level Fees.
Departmental Funding.
Departmental Transport.
School Staffing.
Schools Building Projects.
School Staffing.
Decentralisation Programme.
Chuaigh an Leas-Cheann Comhairle i gceannas ar 2.30 p.m. Paidir.1. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the projected cost to date of the communications unit in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29464/08]
2. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the plans he has to make changes to the operation of the media monitoring unit within his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30106/08]
3. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of persons employed in the communications unit in his Department and their grades and salaries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34894/08]
The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
The projected cost of the communications unit for 2008 is €302,235. There are four civil servants employed in the unit: two executive officers, one staff officer and one clerical officer. Their salaries are €50,410, €44,931, €41,566 and €34,642, plus one sixth allowance for shift work. The role of the communications unit is under continual review in terms of its efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Following a recent review of the unit’s work, in conjunction with an audit of Departments’ use of external media monitoring companies, various possibilities were explored with a view to improving efficiency, eliminating duplication and implementing cost savings.
To assess whether a viable alternative solution is available that would achieve those objectives, the Department of the Taoiseach has issued a tender for a centralised Government contract for the provision of a press cutting and media monitoring service for all Government Departments. Some Departments have agreed individual contracts with media monitoring companies to be provided with media notifications specific to their areas. To ensure that the most efficient and effective service is available in Departments, it was decided to explore the possibility of appointing a single provider that could provide a viable solution, leading to cost savings across the service. The tenders that were received are being considered. A decision whether to proceed on this basis will be made.
[498]Deputy Enda Kenny: Does that mean the communications unit, as it currently exists, will be abolished? In 2003-04, the Taoiseach’s predecessor as Minister for Finance had a bill for press cutting services of €1,800. I suppose that represented value for money. In 2007, when the Taoiseach was Minister for Finance, that bill had increased by 380% to €30,000. Given that all of this activity goes on in every Department anyway, can the Taoiseach justify spending €30,000 of public money on press cuttings when he was in the Department of Finance? This evening, the Dáil will consider a motion relating to the withdrawal of funds to vaccinate young children at a time when the Government is spending a fortune on finding out what Ministers are saying and what is of news to them in various Departments. Can the Taoiseach comment on that? At a time when children between the ages of ten and 12 are being denied essential vaccinations, it seems extraordinary that so much public money is being spent on getting public servants to take press cuttings and inform Ministers of what others are saying about them, or what is going on in their Departments.
The Taoiseach: The public servants in question work within the departmental system. It is obvious that they are available to work elsewhere as well. The question of savings does not arise in that sense. The purpose of the service that is being provided by these public servants is to ensure that the work of the Government is portrayed accurately in the national public media so any inaccuracies, misrepresentations or errors are corrected quickly. That is the purpose of the communications unit, which has been in place for some time. The Department is ascertaining whether it is possible to achieve further cost savings by putting in place a viable alternative to the present arrangements.
Deputy Enda Kenny: It seems public servants in every Department of State are required to dedicate part of their working day to going through newspapers to see whether they contain matters of relevance to the Ministers and Ministers of State in that Department. They have to put together a file of such clippings and present it to the Minister or Minister of State so he or she can read what the media has to say about him or her. This appears to be a replication of the work being done by the communications unit of the Department of the Taoiseach. At a time when the Taoiseach and others are rightly speaking about the need for real public service reform, why are the absolutely brilliant young men and women who have gone through the public service examination system and entered the public service being required to dedicate some of their time to cutting out, photocopying and pasting newspaper pieces and presenting them to Ministers? At a time of financial crisis for hundreds of thousands of families, surely public servants should not have to waste their time going through newspapers to find out what is being written about Ministers and Ministers of State. It would be easy to make some fairly radical proposals to deal with this problem. There is no need for facilities of this nature to be provided to Ministers and Ministers of State in every Department. The work that is being done at Government level is being replicated at enormous public cost.
The Taoiseach: That is not the situation in terms of the work these public servants do. A small part of the work of some public servants involves giving Ministers’ offices an indication of the media coverage of what is going on in their Departments. The press offices in the various Departments provide much more assistance and value than that. It is a question of ensuring that the communications unit in the Department of the Taoiseach, to which the questions tabled to me relate, is working effectively. We are checking whether they can operate more effectively than they are operating at the moment. It is quite right that we would review the operation of the unit from time to time. Press offices are involved in far more than the Deputy is suggesting. Press offices provide for such a huge demand from many media outlets, both print and electronic, on an ongoing basis that the interaction between a Department and the [499]public via the media is an intrinsic part of its work and, therefore, reducing that work to suggest it is simply about pasting is a little superfluous.
Deputy Enda Kenny: If the communications unit of the Taoiseach, on behalf of the Government, is working effectively, why is it necessary that press units of Departments and Ministers of State must still involve themselves in gathering press clippings as part of their work? Surely, this information could be sent electronically to every Minister and Minister of State with them being told “That is the news for today. Your press office does not need to involve itself anymore in press cuttings”. When the Taoiseach was Minister for Finance, a sum of €30,000 was spent on press cuttings. At this time, he is well aware many people are under serious pressure and it is difficult for them to understand public servants being required as part of their duties to involve themselves every day in putting together press clippings for Ministers who are all absent from the House to find what is being said about them. If the Government’s communications unit is working effectively, it should not be necessary to gather press clippings in all Departments. The Minister for Education and Science recently said he had a file of clippings about third level fees. Where did that come from? Did that come from the communications unit or the press office?
The Taoiseach: I do not know where it came from, probably from the relevant section in the Department. It does not matter. I do not know what the argument is about. Press offices in every Department deal with the media on an ongoing basis in a range of areas. The Deputy knows better than I do about the proliferation of media outlets and one must deal with that. One can decide to deal with that or not but it is better that everyone deals with that.
The questions relate to the communications unit and I indicated in my reply the initiative being taken to see if we can contribute to a more effective way in which the unit does its work of monitoring how the national media portray the Government’s work to the public to make sure it is an accurate reflection of where we are at and to inform Ministers accordingly.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Taoiseach said the Government intended to invite tenders for a press cuttings service. If the Government succeeds in attracting a successful tender for such a service, will that mean the services of the communication unit in his Department will then be dispensed with or will we end up with in a situation where we have the communications unit in his Department, a press office in every other Department and, on top of that, a press cuttings service contracted out somewhere? If the tendering process is concluded, where will the savings be made for the public purse? Will they be made by way of standing down the communications unit or by reductions in staff, perhaps, in the press units of individual Departments?
Is it not the case the days of press cuttings services are over? Why is the Government seeking such a service anyway? Most media have websites and most newspapers have their own electronic editions. If Ministers want to find out what is going on in the world these days, they should not have to be reliant on the press cuttings provided by the communications unit summarising all the various radio and television news and current affairs programmes and, as they are being driven around in their State cars, they could look up any number of sites for breaking news on a Blackberry to find out what is happening in the world and break out of the splendid isolation in which they appear to exist. If they could not do that, it should be possible for their press offices to check out the archives available on radio and newspaper websites to find the article or broadcast to which they need to respond. What purpose does this press cuttings service serve? Press cuttings services are a thing of the past.
[500]The Taoiseach: The questions relate to the communications unit and its work. The point I have been making is that currently some Departments have individual contracts with media monitoring companies to provide them with media notification specific to their areas. In order to ensure that the most efficient and effective service is utilised across Departments, we decided to explore the appointment of a single provider that could provide a viable solution leading to cost savings across the service. The purpose of the arrangements we are considering is to see if there is a viable way of doing this far more cost-effectively than at present.
As a former officeholder, Deputy Gilmore will be aware that the press office is involved in far more that what is being portrayed here today. I made the same point to the Leader of the Opposition. In fact, since Deputy Gilmore held office there is a far greater proliferation of media outlets to be contended with and dealt with professionally and effectively than was the case previously. That requires a workload which is part of the work of a Department of State, part of providing information upon request and part of ensuring that those who have queries on matters are dealt with. That is an ongoing element of the work of a Department which could be involved in the expenditure of billions of euro. It is in that context that, clearly, one must have a press office arrangement to deal with the plethora of inquiries and, indeed, in terms of presenting to the public or to the public via the media various policy initiatives, decisions and allocations of public moneys being made.
It is quite normal, proper procedure that such would be the case and the idea that one could do that job without individual press offices in Departments where specialised knowledge is available from departmental staff is a nonsense. These people do necessary and important work and to reduce all that work to suggesting that it is a question of going around copying pieces of paper and sending them into the Minister’s office does an injustice to those who are working in those offices.
This work is an important part of the role of a Department in terms of accountability, accuracy and ensuring that the media are in a position to present in full the context of policies and decisions etc. It is part of modern government. It is part of communicating to the public and the idea that it can be done any other way is nonsensical. That being said, one must do it in as efficient and effective a way as possible. In reply to the question tabled, a tender is being sought to see if there is a viable way of doing this in a centralised way. This does not mean replacing the communications unit; it means ensuring that the communications unit can do on behalf of other Departments what is being done separately at present.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I understand the work of and need for a Department press office which, I accept entirely, must issue statements on behalf of the Department and the Minister and communicate to the press and public what a Department is doing. What I am questioning is whether in the modern age this idea of a media-monitoring service still has any relevance or value or whether it is just a waste of money.
There have been such questions about this communications unit on a number of occasions in the past. I had a letter from the Taoiseach’s predecessor just about this time last year setting out in considerable detail what the communications unit does on a daily basis. He described that the staff start at 7 a.m., summarise news headlines and bulletins, the newspapers and every radio and television programme during the day, and circulate these summaries to Ministers and Ministers of State and to various Departments.
Is the Taoiseach trying to tell us that his Ministers and Ministers of State are going around weighed down with the summaries issued to them by the communications unit, and poring over them to see if there is anything of particular relevance to their Department——
Deputy Enda Kenny: If their name is mentioned.
[501]Deputy Eamon Gilmore: ——and if anything has been said by somebody who telephoned Mr. Joe Duffy’s radio programme to which the Minister needs to reply? This is a nonsensical operation. The Taoiseach is now stating that in addition to the communications unit he will spend more public money on a contracted service to work on the media monitoring operation. Given that the Taoiseach acknowledges there is now a wider range of media, what is wrong with a system whereby an item is brought to the attention of the Minister or Department by a journalist and offers an opportunity to respond to it or by a member of the public who hears something on the radio in the morning or reads something in a newspaper about which he or she has a question and contacts the Department and the Department responds to it?
Why do we need a listening station? Why do we have this listening post? Why does the Government operate this MI5-type of operation on the media at taxpayers’ expense when Ministers can listen to the radio themselves and read newspapers? If they hear about something they can look it up on the Internet or get a playback of the item, or someone can do so on their behalf, and they can respond to it. Why do we have media monitoring, centralised or otherwise, or contracted out or otherwise?
This is a waste of money. At a time when the Taoiseach is discussing cutting down the number of State agencies and cutting out waste in the public service I respectfully suggest to him that this is an area, albeit entailing relatively small public expenditure, that the taxpayer could do without. Instead of tendering for another contract for media monitoring the operation should be closed down. Let Ministers and Departments communicate with and respond to the media in the normal way.
The Taoiseach: I do not agree. The role of the unit is to monitor coverage of official Government activity and how it is portrayed in the media. It is right that this is done and that the range of programmes being monitored at present is monitored to ensure Ministers are aware of how policy is being presented. If it is accurate that is fine but if it is not we must deal with it. This is its role.
Press offices in many Departments have their own arrangements with regard to how they monitor the media and it is a matter for them. I want to see whether a more effective way exists than how it is done at present. The view of Opposition Deputies is that we should not have it at all.
The Taoiseach: From the Government’s point of view, there is a need to communicate our message and to ensure it is disseminated properly and accurately——
Deputy Enda Kenny: The Taoiseach is as well off not knowing some of the stuff that is written about him.
The Taoiseach: I am aware of that. Deputy Kenny is cock of the walk himself.
Deputy Enda Kenny: Yes, exactly.
The Taoiseach: He reminds me of a cock in a dung heap.
Deputy Seán Barrett: The Taoiseach should spend a couple of years on this side of the House and see what it is like to have newspaper monitoring.
The Taoiseach: He is like a crowing cock in a dung heap. In terms of modern communications, this communications unit serves this role. I am trying to ensure we do this as effectively [502]and efficiently as possible. It will not meet the requirements of Opposition Deputies because they do not want it.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I want to know what it is for.
The Taoiseach: Deputy Gilmore knows exactly what it is for but he likes to portray it as something else.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: It is daft. It is a waste of money.
The Taoiseach: He speaks about it being an MI5-type operation on the media. He should cop himself on.
Deputy Finian McGrath: Big brother.
Deputy Phil Hogan: God be with the days when the Taoiseach’s predecessor had a file on everyone.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I call Deputy Ó Caoláin..
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: What a cue.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: How often, in the course of a day, does the Taoiseach take the time to read the reports of the communications unit on its monitoring of broadcast and print media reports? I do not know what is the practice. Does the Taoiseach inform himself personally from this or is it done by someone else within the Department? How does it work?
With regard to tendering to the private sector and PR interests taking up the responsibility of monitoring and preparing a scrapbook, have invitations to tender gone out in the normal way? Has the Taoiseach had a number of responses? Is a timeframe in place by which a decision will be taken to offer a contract? Will the Taoiseach indicate whether tendering has presented? As far as I recall, the figure cited by the Taoiseach at the outset for the cost of the monitoring unit was approximately €302,000. Does this involve a saving? The Taoiseach indicated that part of the review was to identify savings. In terms of opening it up to private interests, are there signalled savings? I am sceptical in this regard but I would appreciate the Taoiseach sharing the salient details with us.
Will the Taoiseach note that whatever about the valid question marks raised by colleagues this afternoon in regard to the current methodology, that is, civil servants being employed in the communications unit to carry out this work, I believe that privatising this service would be an even less favoured approach?
The Taoiseach: As I said, the communications unit provides updates on media issues during the course of the day. I would see updates from time to time but I do not seek them out at any particular time of the day. It depends on how busy I am, but they are part of my papers as I go about my business. It helps to know what is going on.
In regard to tendering, I have not seen any tenders and they have been sought in the normal way. They will be examined and dealt with and I will be notified of the tender and whether it is intended to proceed with the new arrangement. I will await the outcome of that. I do not involve myself in the process in an operational fashion; it is dealt with at official level in the normal way.
In regard to the Deputy’s question on privatisation, the objective is to see whether there is a more effective and efficient way of doing it than is currently the case. That will emerge presumably from the tendering process. If people are concerned, as we all would be, regarding [503]the effective use of taxpayers’ money in the context of doing the job we have to do and ensuring Government policies are understood and presented in an accurate way as we interface with the media on an ongoing basis, as the Government must, then if there is a viable alternative which offers a more effective way of doing it, why should we not consider it? Our intention is to address the issue raised in these parliamentary questions, which is to see what is the most effective way of doing this job, which is a small but important part of our business. That is the motivation behind it.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: The Taoiseach’s response suggests that the product of the working of the unit is only noted in a casual way and that there is no systematic way of monitoring its reports or taking up the information highlighted in the reports. If the Taoiseach is not the person intended to take heed of the information in a substantive way, is there somebody else within the Department who must do so and who scrutinises the monitoring reports of the communications unit?
To return to the point about the tendering process the Taoiseach indicated, I understand this was reported first in September, going back a couple of months, in preparation for today’s series of meetings. I would have expected either the Taoiseach himself or his colleagues in the Department to have prepared an adequate briefing note to advise us of what stage the tendering process has now reached. Has it concluded, was a deadline set for the receipt of tenders, how many were received, what is the expected duration of the consideration of the tenders and when will a decision be taken on whether a contract will issue? Can the Taoiseach shed more light on this than he has indicated so far this afternoon?
The Taoiseach: No, because I do not micro-manage tendering arrangements, as I have explained. I do not involve myself in them — they are dealt with in the normal way at official level, as all these matters are dealt with. A report will come to me as soon as consideration has been given to any tenders that have come in. I am told that a decision on whether to proceed on such a basis will be made shortly. I do not involve myself in these types of issues, which are dealt with quite properly at official level.
Deputy Seán Barrett: The Taoiseach is the chairman of the Cabinet sub-committee on climate change and energy security. What is the role of the communications unit in communicating the message about what will be needed in the future to deal with the targets set for this country and the proposals the Government has to deal with these two major issues? This is where a communications unit should exercise itself. There is a total lack of understanding among the public about what we are facing. Rather than clipping items from newspapers, could this unit spend its time informing the public about the serious issues that the Taoiseach, as chairperson of the Cabinet sub-committee, and his Government colleagues must face in agriculture, transport and other Departments? Nobody has a clue about this. We have set ourselves targets that are not being achieved and we are entering into an agreement for 2012 to 2020 for further major cuts of up of 30% in our emissions. This will have effects on industry, farming and various aspects of people’s lives and they must be prepared for it. I ask the Taoiseach to direct the energies of the communications unit to informing the public and the media of what we must do to prepare ourselves.
The Taoiseach: That is not the role of the media monitoring that takes place in the communications unit. That is dealt with by the Government Information Services, the GIS, and by press officers in individual Departments, such as those of the Ministers, Deputy Eamon Ryan and Deputy John Gormley.
[504]Deputy Seán Barrett: I am talking about the communications. The Taoiseach is chairperson of the Cabinet sub-committee.
The Taoiseach: I am aware of that. Those deliberations continue within the Cabinet sub-committee. The Deputy will be aware it is not the practice to speak about the deliberations of such committees, no more than about the deliberations within the Cabinet. They deal with decisions. Ongoing negotiations are taking place regarding the EU’s efforts to come to full agreement on the 20% target it set in preparation for the Copenhagen meeting next year and a commitment to move to 30% if a global agreement can be secured. Indeed, the Deputy’s committee is another forum where information can be made available to the public.
There has been extensive coverage of this issue. Granted, ordinary members of the public do not get involved to the same extent as legislators. That is what one would expect. However, when decisions are taken, that can be dealt with. In the meantime, negotiations continue and discussions are ongoing. Providing the maximum flexibility possible for us to meet these targets is the objective of the negotiators who are currently engaged with the various elements of the Commission who are dealing with this. Now that the Presidency is involved as we go into the final phase of discussions before the December Council meeting, when it is expected the decision will be taken, those engagements will intensify.
4. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach when the cross-departmental team on infrastructure and public private partnership will next meet; the number of meetings of the team planned for the remainder of 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29467/08]
5. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach when the cross-departmental team on infrastructure and public private partnership last met; when the next meeting is due; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29624/08]
6. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on social inclusion last met; and when the next meeting is due [29625/08]
7. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the number of occasions on which the cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and public private partnership met in 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34895/08]
8. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on social inclusion will next meet. [34896/08]
The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 to 8, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet committee on social inclusion, children and integration met on 13 February 2008 and is scheduled to meet again on 26 November 2008.
The cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and PPPs has met on six occasions this year, most recently on 23 September 2008. It is due to hold two further meetings before the end of the year, one tomorrow, 12 November, and the other on 9 December. The role of the cross-departmental team is to assist in progressing and resolving issues related to infrastructure planning and delivery, and ensuring that they are adequately prepared for consideration by the relevant Cabinet committee and, where necessary, by the Government.
Questions about the business actually conducted at Cabinet committees or cross-departmental team meetings have never been allowed in the House on the grounds that they are internal [505]to Government. Questions about the delivery of any particular infrastructure project, housing policy or the role of PPPs should be directed to the responsible Minister.
Deputy Enda Kenny: There were five key projects due for completion by the end of 2008 under Transport 21. The spend will reach almost €8 billion. The projects are the joining of the Tallaght and Sandyford Luas lines in the city centre; the Luas extension from Connolly Station to the Docklands; the Luas extension from Tallaght to Citywest, which is subject to developer contributions; the Cork commuter rail service to Midleton; and the Ennis-Athenry rail line. None of these will be completed, as was envisaged, by the end of 2008. The Department of Transport has said it is prioritising various schemes, which means it is pushing back other projects which have not reached contract stage. Given that Ireland has dropped from 55th place in 2007 to 64th place in 2008 out of 134 countries in the global competitiveness report dealing with the quality of overall infrastructure, is the Taoiseach concerned this startling fact alone damages the business environment and business attractiveness of Ireland?
I refer to the cross-departmental team on housing, infrastructure and public private partnerships. What are the implications for Transport 21, which had a definitive end date of 2015? Is it the view of the Taoiseach and the team that the completion date can still be met, or will many of the projects never see the light of day? What will happen projects involving contracts which are not yet signed? Is it envisaged these will be delayed forever and a day? Does the Taoiseach see all proposals in Transport 21 reaching contract stage?
The Taoiseach: Deputy Kenny emphasised a point which I make also, which is the need to maintain a public investment programme even at a time when we have seen a severe downturn in performance in terms of the growth of the economy as an indication of the commitment of the Government to continue to put in place the building blocks that will enhance competitiveness, not only during these difficult times, but when the upturn comes in the global economy. The Government maintains its overall commitment to keep capital investment at between 5% and 6% of GNP during the current the national development plan. We have given priority to projects which have an economic return, which will allow us to continue to build upon the competitiveness building blocks of the economy.
We are near the end of the third year of the Transport 21 programme and strong progress has been made in the delivery of road and public transport projects. Some 37 projects have been completed since the beginning of Transport 21 in 2006 and a further 25 projects are underway. Some of the major achievements to date include progress on the major inter-urban routes connecting Dublin with the Border, Galway, Cork, Limerick and Waterford. These schemes are already open to the public and are on target for completion by 2010.
New inter-city rail cars have been introduced on the Dublin to Limerick, Dublin to Westport, Dublin to Waterford and Dublin to Galway lines. New carriages have been rolled out for the Dublin to Cork line, facilitating an hourly service in both directions. Several new railway stations have opened, namely, Docklands, Park West, Cherry Orchard and Clondalkin Fonthill. A state-of-the-art maintenance facility has been provided at Portlaoise train depot. Construction has begun on several key Transport 21 projects, including the Luas extension to the Docklands and Cherrywood, the Kildare route project and phase one of the western corridor project. There are issues of land acquisition and planning involved and the Railway Procurement Agency, RPA, has been very proactive with communities in that regard, particularly on public transport projects. Much progress is being made in this area and we continue to commit significant funds to these projects.
Regarding the third part of the Deputy’s question, planning and preliminary work continues on projects not yet contracted. Decisions on whether we move on some of these projects as set [506]out in Transport 21 is based on the detailed evaluation carried out as these projects were prepared and proceeded. We will make decisions on an ongoing basis at Cabinet depending on the full picture available at the time when these projects are ready to be considered. Overall, Transport 21 reflects a significant part of the public investment programme for the reasons outlined in Deputy Kenny’s original question, which include competitiveness, moving goods and services to the market with the most efficient transport infrastructure we can provide, improving the quality of life especially in urban centres and trying to provide a modern public transport system to counteract historical under-investment in these areas. That is the update of the current situation.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: When did the sub-committee on social inclusion, integration and children last meet?
The Taoiseach: There was a meeting in February, and one will be held this month.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Cabinet sub-committee on social inclusion, children and integration last met in February. This is a year in which the Government has scrapped child benefit for children over 18 and an immunisation scheme for 12 year old girls, has increased class sizes, has scrapped the book grant for children from disadvantaged backgrounds and capped the number of English language teachers for foreign-born students in our schools.
The Taoiseach: Those issues were discussed in full by the Cabinet.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: What is the purpose of the sub-committee on social inclusion, children and integration? Which Minister is responsible for convening it? This shows more clearly than anything the level of priority and consideration that this Government gives to the concepts of social inclusion, protection of children and the integration problems in our schools and the wider society. The specific Cabinet sub-committee responsible for these important areas of Government policy has not met since February, yet Ministers of State are appointed with responsibility for children and integration. We have more Ministers of State and advisers than ever, yet this sub-committee has not met since February. This speaks volumes of the lack of priority that the Government gives to these areas, and what it thinks about poverty and social exclusion in this country.
The Taoiseach: I do not agree with that contention because we have established Ministers of State with cross-cutting responsibilities in these areas. There has also been much discussion of these issues at full Cabinet meetings. The suggestion that social inclusion matters do not arise unless they are raised at Cabinet committee level is not the issue. The full Cabinet has been dealing with many of these issues in recent times. The cross-cutting responsibilities of Ministers of State on integration, the elderly and so on have helped the co-ordinating mechanism.
The success of the Office of the Minister for Children has meant that we have extended that idea into other areas which deal with social inclusion. When the offices of the different Ministers of State pull together, the situation is far better than what happened in the past, when individual Departments were pulled together through the Cabinet sub-committee system. That work is ongoing and the fact that we have set it up in this way does not mean it has not been given priority. On the contrary, it has been given high priority.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Will the cross-departmental team address the scandalous situation where two private contractors have pulled out of five key social housing projects in Dublin? I refer to St. Michael’s estate, O’Devaney Gardens, Dominick Street, the convent lands on Seán McDermott Street and Infirmary Road. Is the Taoiseach aware that communities [507]in these areas have been waiting for years for the opportunity to see the long overdue enhancement of their neighbourhoods? Has the cross-departmental team taken any action on this? If I recall correctly, housing was the first component part of the public private partnership project. Will the Taoiseach indicate what steps will now be taken, given the clear failure of the PPP approach allied to local government, to ensure that the necessary moneys will be provided to the appropriate council — Dublin City Council — in order that these communities do not continue to suffer as they have done over a generation?
The Taoiseach: The Minister of State, Deputy Finneran, and Dublin City Council have been working continually on that matter since an issue arose regarding the contracts for those important housing projects. PPPs have a role to play. They do not subsume the role of other means by which housing is provided by the State, including direct Exchequer funding, local authorities or many other approaches, such as affordable or voluntary housing schemes. Many models provide a differentiated approach in respect of different housing needs, rather than the old approach which was almost exclusively a local authority funded and directed operation. That provided for uniform solutions——
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: The Taoiseach has moved to the other extreme.
The Taoiseach: ——which did not exactly bring social harmony in many respects, or a social mix. The affordable homes partnership is an excellent example of how, with a much more flexible approach, housing is being provided for families in a far more enlightened way than the traditional model of provision did in the past. All of these have a role to play and one method does not subsume the other. The specific issue raised by the Deputy is continuing to be investigated by Dublin City Council. The matter was raised in the House when the prospective developer indicated that he was not able to proceed.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: That concludes questions to the Taoiseach.
90. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the progress made on her announcement in July 2008 to achieve targeted savings of €25 million by tackling fraud; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40021/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Since July 2008, additional control measures have been introduced with a view to achieving savings of €25 million from the detection or avoidance of fraud. These measures target the jobseeker’s allowance and benefit schemes, one parent family payment and child benefit schemes.
This year, the option to review payments by electronic fund transfer was removed for new claimants for jobseeker payments. They must attend in person at the post office each week, thus confirming their continued residency in the country. Their claim is automatically suspended where two consecutive payments are not collected.
Control activity has been across a number of schemes this year. For example, at end September 2008, some 289,000 reviews has been carried out, as well as 2,300 employer inspections, yielding savings of €337 million. In addition, the special investigation unit is undertaking more regular interviews of jobseeker recipients, particularly those with high risk ratings. The savings realised since July 2008 are €5.7 million. Lone parent recipients with earnings are [508]targeted for review, and a special project in Kilbarrack yielded €388,000. Child benefit mailshots have been increased from half-yearly to quarterly intervals. It is expected that 1,200 cases will be terminated with potential savings of €13 million.
I am committed to ensuring that social welfare payments are available to those who are entitled to them. However, I am also determined to ensure that abuse of the system is prevented and dealt with effectively when detected. In this regard, the control programme of the Department is carefully monitored and the various measures are continually refined to ensure they remain effective.
My Department will continue targeting activities to achieve the maximum return on its efforts and will place increased emphasis on eliminating fraud and abuse of its schemes to achieve the necessary savings this year and into 2009.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Looking at the figures cited by the Minister, I do not see how they will reach an extra €25 million in savings by the end of the year. If it is €13 million in total in the six months for child benefit, €5.7 million from July until now in respect of another payment, and €388,000 from a special lone parent project, even allowing for some more from the €5.7 million for this month and December, I do not see how it will reach €25 million. I wish to ask the Minister about controls to achieve savings. I welcome the fact people will have to attend post offices in person, which will obviously reduce some elements of fraud. I draw the Minister’s attention to the reply to my freedom of information request about social welfare fraud. According to the reply, in the period from August 2004 to December 2004, one officer assigned to the Garda National Immigration Bureau generated savings of €1.468 million by the termination of about 234 claims for 146 customers. It must be questioned whether there are far more savings to be made from an immigration perspective.
The Minister will also be aware of the different statistics for fraud as between non-nationals and Irish nationals. What extra action does the Minister intend to take in addition to this €25 million saving to address the issue? I understand it is approximately 13% for non-nationals as against 1% for Irish nationals.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy is correct that it is important to continue to have strong control measures. As money becomes more scarce, we must ensure that it is targeted at the right people. A total of 620 staff members throughout the country are involved in control in some form. The Deputy referred to the rule for signing on each week as having some impact. Other segments being targeted are the 18 to 25 year olds who are regarded as a particular risk group by our special investigation unit. People who have had their claims suspended are also investigated. The group involved in the employment action plan but who are still on the live register are constantly being reviewed, as also are those on the job seekers and child benefit schemes.
I referred to the amounts we intend to save on the child benefit scheme this year. We regularly send out letters to families receiving child benefit to ascertain if they are resident in the country. If a reply is not received within 21 days, payment is suspended after 42 days and then stopped completely if no further information is received from them. We also carry out a check with schools etc. to ensure that the information supplied by the claimant is valid.
A survey conducted on child benefit a few years ago among 500 Irish nationals showed that the fraud rate was about 1.7%, but the fraud rate among a sample of 500 non-nationals was almost 14% so this is a particular group to be targeted. This month, the Department will be writing to 7,000 non-national families with children resident in Ireland and 2,300 with children who are not resident in Ireland.
[509]Deputy Olwyn Enright: Is this particular emphasis on child benefit a new initiative? How much money has been lost in the past few years?
Of the cases referred to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor for 2005, 2006 and 2007, there does not seem to have been one case of child benefit fraud referred by the Minister’s Department. If there was a potential for several millions of euro in savings from July to date, this begs the question as to how much could have been saved each year for the past three years, which are the statistics available to me. It seems clear that the majority of cases referred to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor are with regard to jobseeker's assistance and jobseeker's benefit. Is it the case that there is more fraud in that area? From what the Minister said, it seems there has been quite a degree of fraud in the child benefit area, yet it does not appear that one person has been prosecuted. Can the Minister explain this?
Acting Chairman (Deputy Noel O’Flynn): We are out of time on this question. I ask the Minister to reply.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: When tackling fraud one must use methods of prevention, detection, deterrence and debt recovery. All of those methods can be used before ever resorting to prosecution.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Prosecution is the best deterrent.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Every effort is made at all stages to try to recover any moneys which have been overpaid. So far this year, 235 cases of general claims have been sent to the Chief State Solicitor’s office. We do not wish to go down the road of taking prosecutions against people but debt recovery is probably the most important. We will continue to ensure that good control measures are in place.
91. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the consideration she has given to the implications of the proposed removal of child benefit in respect of 18 year olds for the participation of poorer children in their final year in secondary school or in further education. [39946/08]
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Child benefit is paid for all children up to the age of 16 years and also for children up to the age of 19 years who continue in full-time education and for children with a disability. Child benefit is tax free and is not affected by the level of income of the claimant.
The rates of child benefit have increased very significantly since 2001, by over 200% for the first and second child and by over 185% for each other child. In the same period, total expenditure on child benefit has increased by 297%.
In the context of the current economic circumstances, it has been necessary to take a number of steps to reduce overall public expenditure in order to restore order and stability in the public finances. Spending on social welfare payments at some €19.5 billion in 2009 forms a substantial portion of public finances. Expenditure on child benefit will reach €2.53 billion in 2009. In these circumstances, it has been necessary to limit spending on child benefit by lowering the upper age limit that currently applies from 19 years to 18 years. The impact of this measure is being phased in, with payment for existing and future qualifying children being halved from January 2009 and payment stopping from the 18th birthday from January 2010. The vast majority of leaving certificate students will not be affected by this change because over 70% [510]are under the age of 18 years when they sit their leaving certificate examinations. Many others turn 18 within a few months of their exams.
It is recognised that any changes in child benefit entitlements may have implications for family budgets. Accordingly, in order to assist the more vulnerable in society, special alleviating measures are being introduced for those in low income and social welfare dependent households. A compensatory payment of €15 is being provided during 2009 and 2010 for any week during which those affected by this measure are receiving a social welfare payment, which includes an increase in respect of the 18 year old child or a family income supplement payment which includes payment in respect of that child. The compensatory payment will also apply where the child in question is receiving a disability allowance payment in his or her own right. In addition, households affected by the measure who also qualify for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance will receive an extra payment of €215, bringing the total payment in respect of such a child to €520. These transitional measures will cease in January 2011.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister has not answered my question. I asked her a straightforward question about the consideration she has given to the implications of withdrawing child benefit for 18 year olds. The reason I asked that question was because she, of all people, should know the implications of withdrawing child benefit for 18 year olds, given her experience in the Department of Education and Science. She should know that a minority of children from low income families actually stay on in school until the leaving certificate. She should also know that there are huge financial pressures on teenage children in low income families and, unfortunately, many of them — if not the majority — cannot stay on in school for financial reasons. The Minister knows that at this stage, because of transition year, a great many leaving certificate students are over 18 years. Education should not end at 18 anyway and all efforts should be made to ensure that children from low income families remain in the education system past leaving certificate and into further education.
The Minister also knows that the evidence from research indicates that leaving certificate students who participate in part-time work do so to the detriment of their academic achievement. The Minister knows all of this from her previous experience as Minister for Education and Science and in view of those facts, I am asking her why she decided to target the teenage children of low income families. Will the Minister tell the House on what basis she thought those families could take a hit of €38 a week?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: We appreciate it is always very difficult for any family to have to take a financial hit.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister does not seem to appreciate it. What is the basis for the hit?
Acting Chairman: Allow the Minister to reply without interruption.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Unfortunately, when one is faced with the current economic situation and financial pressures, and given that the budget of my Department is €19.5 billion, we are under pressure to find money to protect the people who will lose their jobs and their families. The money had to be found somewhere. We looked at the figures and realised that the Deputy is incorrect. The vast majority of students are under 18 years when they sit the leaving certificate——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Many are over 18. Does the Minister want them to drop out of education?
[511]Deputy Mary Hanafin: Certainly not. I wish to correct the Deputy’s statement. In the leaving certificate cohort of 2007, some 35,900 were under the age of 18 and 14,000 were 18 years. Many of those would have turned 18 between April and June of that year so, in effect, they would have completed their second level education. That is not completing education, which I fully accept. The Deputy is also incorrect to state the vast majority of people are dropping out of school. The completion rates in school are now 86%, which is also very——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The majority of low income teenagers are dropping out of school before leaving certificate.
Acting Chairman: The Minister, without interruption.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy is incorrect. It is not the majority.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: It is the majority in any disadvantaged area.
Acting Chairman: Allow the Minister to continue.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Increasingly, we are seeing that the completion rate of people in second level schools is at 86%, which is encouraging, although of course it would need to go higher.
It is also the case, although I would like to see it otherwise, that schools that qualify for disadvantaged status for the most part do not offer transition year. Many of the students who would be completing their education at 18 years of age, with the opportunity of hopefully continuing on to third level education, would also qualify for third level grants. These are the people about whom the Deputy expressed concern. They will not have to pay registration fees and may also qualify for maintenance grants. Given the changes in child benefit, we are at least getting them through their second level education and hopefully they will then qualify for the third level education grants as well.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister is being fundamentally dishonest. There is a sizeable number of teenagers who are still in school after the age of 18 years. In view of what the Minister knows about educational disadvantage and the fact there are scandalously low levels of participation in education up to leaving certificate in low income families and disadvantaged areas, on what basis did she decide that low income families can take a hit of €38 per week?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy will be aware that the low income families are the people who are protected for next year and the year after.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: They are not.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: This is pathetic.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The compensatory factors which have been introduced to support those people who are on social welfare——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister is being dishonest. There are transitional arrangements for two years.
Acting Chairman: Deputy Shortall——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: After the two years, how do they make up the €38 per week?
[512]Acting Chairman: Can Deputy Shortall hear me? My job is to chair these proceedings. We are over time on this question. I must ask the Deputy to have respect for the Chair when she is called to order, whatever about for myself.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister——
Acting Chairman: Will Deputy Shortall do that, please?
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister is being dishonest in her replies.
Acting Chairman: Will the Minister give a short reply because I need to move to the next question?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I understand that. The last paragraph of the reply I gave to the Deputy set out exactly what the compensatory measures were. The final line was——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: What happens when they are finished?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: If I may, the final line of the answer states: “These transitional measures will cease in January 2011”. The figures I have given show that approximately 10,000 students are 18 years of age when doing their leaving certificate. All others are under the age of 18 or have just reached it coming up to the examinations.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: It is too bad for them. Is that what the Minister is saying?
92. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will provide details of the increased controls designed to achieve savings which were initially intended to be realised by stopping the payment of the disability allowance to disabled teenagers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40022/08]
Deputy Mary Hanafin: In the social welfare budget, I announced that the age of eligibility for entitlement to disability allowance would be increased from 16 to 18 years for new claimants with effect from 1 January 2009. As an alleviating measure, the age for entitlement to the domiciliary care allowance would be increased from 16 to 18 years from the same date. These measures were estimated to save €5.6 million on my Department’s Vote while giving rise to a cost of €1.4 million on the HSE Vote. Accordingly, the net saving to the Exchequer in 2009 was expected to be of the order of €4.2 million.
The changes announced in the budget were designed to address concerns raised about the appropriateness of paying young people a social welfare payment in their own right at the age of 16. It was feared that receiving the payment at an early age could undermine the incentive to pursue work, training or education options and cause them to become welfare dependent too early.
Following the budget I met six different groups representing people with disabilities and disability service providers. At these meetings, the underlying principle of the budget measure, namely, that it is inappropriate to pay a social welfare payment to a 16 year old in his or her own right, was not seriously contested. The key concern expressed by the groups related to the loss of expected income at short notice to families of young people with disabilities.
Following these meetings, I recommended to the Government that the disability allowance continue to be paid to 16 and 17 year olds pending a full review of the scheme. The review is considering a wide range of issues as identified by groups representing people with disabilities, [513]their families and service providers, and will take account of a forthcoming report on disability and illness benefits by the OECD. It will also draw on new data published by the Central Statistics Office last week from the national disability survey 2006.
An amount of €1.4 million which will not now be required for the domiciliary care allowance measure will be transferred from the HSE Vote to my Department. Accordingly, the net impact on social welfare expenditure of not proceeding with the budget proposal is €4.2 million. This represents just 0.02% of projected overall social welfare expenditure in 2009 and will be accommodated by ongoing efficiencies across the whole range of the Department’s activities next year. It will not be necessary to introduce further measures affecting entitlements or payments.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Given the Minister’s answer, she clearly did not learn anything from the announcement made in the budget. She is still trying to claim that the families were looking for this measure when she refers to the six different voluntary bodies which did not seriously contest what she did. The families involved seriously contested the decision the Minister made. The decision was wrong and the fact the Minister still seems to be considering it in a different context is wrong.
In any case, that was not the question I asked. If the Minister reads the question, she will see the last line of her answer is all that refers to the question asked. I asked the Minister from where in her budget she will save the €4.2 million that was ring-fenced when she was going to make this change. Both the Minister and the Taoiseach said in the media that she was going to find these savings elsewhere in her Department. The specific question I asked was from where those savings will come. The Minister was able to say she would get them so she should account for them to the House.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I met the six groups to which the Deputy referred and, as I noted in my reply, those whom I met have not contested the principle of this, either then or subsequently. If anybody in the House would look at this, they would realise it is a valid principle not to make a social welfare payment to a person at 16 years of age.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister should deal with the question. She has a requirement to do so.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: That issue is not contested.
Acting Chairman: It is not Deputy Enright’s job to intervene. Her job is to hear the answer.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister is not giving the answer to the question asked.
Acting Chairman: Let the Minister speak. Let me do the job I am put here to do and let the Deputy do the job she is supposed to do, if she does not mind.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Do it, please.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The overall budget is €19.6 billion. We believe that with increased control savings, some of which I referred to in the first answer, we will be able to save another €4.2 million. A figure of €19.6 million is an enormous sum in this context. Judging by the success of some of the activities we have undertaken this year in our controls, particularly in regard to the jobseeker’s and child benefit, as well as other initiatives we hope to take in this regard, I envisage there should be no difficulty in saving €4 million next year.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Every time there is a problem, the Minister tells us she will make increased savings. She told us in July or August she would get €25 million in savings, which [514]was the subject matter of the first question. However, she was unable to explain how that €25 million has been obtained. Now, she is telling us she will save another €4.2 million in respect of this through increased savings. From where is that €4.2 million to come? If it is so easy to make savings by increased controls, as she seems to think, why has the Department, the Minister and her predecessors not been doing this every year for the past number of years? I again ask the Minister to outline how exactly the saving of €4.2 million will be accounted for in the Department’s budget.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: This is only early November, which is why we have not yet reached the target of €25 million, but we would envisage doing so by the end of December.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: It does not look like it.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: To the end of September, total savings of €331 million were made by the Department in all kinds of savings and control.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: They were already budgeted for.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I will be reviewing those that have been the most successful, and I have already highlighted some. Out of a budget of €19.6 billion, it is my intention to save the further €4 million that would have been required under this disability allowance initiative.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister cannot answer the question.
93. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason she has not used the social welfare Bill as an opportunity to address the eligibility criteria for the back-to-education allowance; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40023/08]
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The objective of the back-to-education allowance scheme is to equip people on social welfare payments with qualifications that will enable them to obtain employment in the modern labour market. It is a second chance educational opportunities scheme for people on welfare payments who wish to participate in full-time education and who would not otherwise be able to do so.
The allowance is paid at a standard weekly rate equivalent to the maximum rate of the relevant social welfare payment that qualifies the applicant for the scheme. It replaces the existing social welfare income and, in addition, an annual €500 cost of education allowance is payable. Also, participants may continue to receive any secondary benefits to which they may have been entitled. In general, an applicant must be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment for six months if pursuing a second level course or 12 months if pursuing a third level course. The qualifying period for the third level option is reduced to nine months for persons who are participating in the national employment action plan process. People who are awarded statutory redundancy may access the scheme immediately, provided an entitlement to a relevant social welfare payment is established prior to commencing an approved course of study.
The scheme has been improved in recent years. The qualifying period for illness benefit recipients was reduced from three to two years and the qualifying period was removed for people who are awarded statutory redundancy. In addition, the cost of education allowance was increased to €500 and the allowance was extended to people signing on the live register for PRSI credits.
[515]The Government has devoted significant resources to the back-to-education allowance. Up to €519 million has been allocated over the lifetime of the national development plan. This year, €70.8 million is available. The number of participants in 2007-08 academic year was 8,883, an increase of 9.8% on the previous academic year. The number of participants has increased again in the current academic year. The number of people on the scheme at the end of September 2008 was, encouragingly, 24% higher than at the end of September 2007.
The back-to-education allowance is an important part of our overall strategy to provide opportunities for unemployed people to upskill in order to enhance their prospects of entering or returning to the labour force. I will continue to monitor the scheme but I believe it continues to meet its objectives and ensures limited resources are directed at those most in need.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: I do not agree with the Minister that the scheme achieves its objectives in that not enough people can get on to it. Since the Minister was encouraged by the increase in the number of participants over the past two years, is she now discouraged that there will be 500 fewer places on the scheme next year?
I am constantly raising this issue because I believe the scheme gives people a chance to re-train and re-educate themselves. When the Minister was recently on the “Prime Time” programme with Deputy Gilmore she said her main priority was education and training. If it is, then how this scheme works should be changed. The Minister claims people who are made redundant do not need to have been in receipt of a year’s relevant social welfare benefit before they can go on to third level. Is she aware that of the 94,502 people who joined the live register in the year to October, only one third was made redundant? This means only one third of those people are eligible to apply for the back-to-education allowance. Has the Minister reviewed or thought about allowing people on the minimum wage to participate in the back-to-education allowance, particularly for those in employment where their prospects are doubtful?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy is incorrect in saying there has been a cutback in the back-to-education allowance. There has been none and I am particularly encouraged by the numbers applying for the scheme. This summer we focused the scheme on those who want to take it up. The more people we can encourage to join the scheme, the better. The facilitators are doing a good job in highlighting the scheme. It shows by targeting a particular group, especially young workers, that it can be successful.
It is a scheme which supports employability, my main aim, and getting people back to work by supporting and facilitating them with education and training. It is not, therefore, appropriate to shift it to people who are currently in employment, albeit on low incomes.
The Deputy referred to those people who unfortunately lost their jobs in the past year. They might not have been able to access education or training immediately but they would have been able to access it within a few months, such as six months in respect of second level. If they were called for the employment action plan, it would mean nine months for third level.
The six month requirement for second level schooling is about right. Many people would start into academic education in September. Were it to be reduced any further, people would be claiming unemployment benefit for three months which is not what we want.
This is a valuable scheme and one I will keep under review. Up to 8,803 people participated last year and participation rates have increased by 24% already this year. The scheme is working and it is my aim we ensure people know and are given advice about it.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Will the Minister clarify the budget brief on education funding? It states: “This will require a reduction in the provision of 500 places on the back to education initiative — reducing the total number of places to 9,000”.
[516]Deputy Mary Hanafin: That is the back-to-education initiative. The Deputy’s question was on the back to education allowance. This is provided to people involved in full-time education. There will be an increase in the amount available for people in that scheme. The back-to-education initiative under education concerns part-time courses and is completely different.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: It is still equally important.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: No, it is not. If I may, Acting Chairman.
Acting Chairman: Deputy Enright, we are out of time.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: I am entitled to a supplementary question.
Acting Chairman: I do not think there is time but I will allow the Deputy to continue.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: For example, a person going on the live register on 31 October would be ineligible for a college course which commences in September or early October next year because he or she will not have been in receipt of the relevant social welfare benefits for one year. People are having to wait a month short of two years to fulfil the criteria for eligibility for the course. This needs to be addressed.
The Minister must also address the small number of people eligible under the redundancy rules and the employment action plan. Two thirds of those coming on the live register must wait one year before they can go on to third level education. I accept the six months’ criteria for second level but that is little comfort to those who want to go into third level education. Will this be re-examined for the coming year or will it be left as it is for now?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: There is no cutting back on the back-to-education allowance. Its purpose is to facilitate people in full-time courses and I am anxious to ensure as many people as possible benefit from it. A person who lost their job on 31 October this year would be able to enter second level education——
Deputy Olwyn Enright: I asked specifically about third level.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: If I may, Acting Chairman. A person who is part of the national employment action programme can, within nine months——
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Only if they are participating in that programme.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: ——which would expire at the end of July of next year, then start on a third level course. People on the live register are called for the employment action plan every three months to ensure we are targeting the right people. The opportunities are there. To claim someone is left on the live register is not the case. The employment action plan is designed to interview people, support them and give them information.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: It is not available to everyone.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: If they are involved in that, they can get——
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Only if they are involved.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Yes, if they are involved, they can get to third level education in nine months.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Not everyone is involved.
[517]Acting Chairman: We will move on to Question No. 94. I am trying to get through all the questions so that Deputy Enright’s will be answered. She knows better than I do that six minutes is allocated to each priority question.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: We want to get to the bottom of matters.
94. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will provide details on the transfer of the Combat Poverty Agency to the Office for Social Inclusion; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40024/08]
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Government’s decision to integrate the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion within my Department was informed by the findings of a review of the Combat Poverty Agency which was undertaken on foot of a Government decision on 6 June 2007. The review will be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas today.
I intend through the integration of the Combat Poverty Agency with the Office for Social Inclusion to ensure we make the best use of the considerable experience and expertise of the staff of both bodies. I believe the new division will provide the framework for an enhanced research role that will provide a stronger voice for those affected by poverty and social inclusion issues. Furthermore, it will have more immediate access to advising the Government and influencing policies on these important issues.
The Department is working with the board of the agency in finalising a plan for the smooth integration of the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion. It is planned to hold meetings and workshops with the staff in both organisations before the plan is finalised.
Several steps are necessary to achieve the integration of the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion. As the Combat Poverty Agency is established under statute, legislation changes will be required to alter its status. I intend bringing forward legislative provisions to effect those changes on Committee Stage of the Social Welfare Bill (Miscellaneous Provisions) 2008. Arrangements regarding the position of the agency staff will be finalised following discussions with the Department of Finance, the staff and their union representatives. Other work will involve winding up the business of the agency including finalising accounts and transferring assets.
I am conscious of the concerns about the need for independent scrutiny of public policy that have been expressed by some interest groups. I agree that independent critique is very important and I intend to ensure the scope for such work continues with the new arrangement. The Combat Poverty Agency has provided a valuable service in highlighting issues of poverty and social inclusion over the last 22 years. However, as the review report notes, the function of independent reporting on poverty is no longer as dependent on the Combat Poverty Agency as it was in earlier years.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Why? Who does it now?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I intend to ask the new division to prioritise the development of procedures to ensure the views of all stakeholders, including people experiencing poverty, continue to be available to Government in developing and monitoring social inclusion strategies.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister’s reply raises quite a few questions. It is utterly cynical and disingenuous of the Minister to introduce the proposed amendments on Committee Stage. She knew at least last Wednesday, two days after the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) [518]Bill was published, that she was going to bring in these changes, and I do not see why she could not have published her intentions in the Bill instead. The way in which the abolition of the Combat Poverty Agency has been handled is deplorable.
What does the Minister mean when she says she wants to guarantee that information will be available to Government? The Combat Poverty Agency had a far wider role than that, which included highlighting issues and making information available to the public and to public representatives in a truly democratic way. How will it operate within the Office for Social Inclusion? Will the members of the agency be able to decide for themselves the issues that need to be highlighted? Does the Minister not think it is an unusual decision, in a time of increasing unemployment and in which we have not met our targets in reducing child poverty, to abolish the Combat Poverty Agency? Can she tell us what financial savings will be made from the amalgamation of the agency with the Office for Social Inclusion?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy will be aware that the process started in June 2007 with the review of the role of the agency and an examination of how it could be more effective. Although the main impetus was not financial, to answer the Deputy’s question, the amount currently spent on the agency is €4.6 million, although some staff will transfer. There are costs with regard to staffing, community projects and so on, but there is much information in the review about how these things should be handled.
I specifically mentioned information for Government because one of the key issues with regard to the Combat Poverty Agency is that its views are taken on board in producing Government policy, legislation and decisions. One of the findings of the review was that the output of the agency was very good but its input was not. It was not effective in ensuring its voice was being heard.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Government did not take its ideas on board.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: That was actually in the review.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: So it was the agency’s fault the Government ignored it.
Acting Chairman: Allow the Minister to continue without interruption, please.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The agency has been in existence for 22 years, which was an issue. We must now find a mechanism whereby the views of the whole team of people——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Whereby the Government can muzzle them.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: ——can be taken on board in conjunction with those of all the other groups that have emerged since the Combat Poverty Agency was established. All these groups play a valuable role, particularly those in the community and voluntary area, although the community and voluntary pillar was unheard of at the time the agency was set up. The amount of statistical information we get on a national as well as an international level from the CSO, the ESRI, the OECD and the EU——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The ESRI commissions work from the Combat Poverty Agency.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: As does the HSE.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: In fact, it is the other way around.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: That is not true.
[519]Deputy Mary Hanafin: Quite a substantial amount of work has been commissioned by the Combat Poverty Agency to be carried out by the ESRI.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: It is the other way around.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Of the last 38 policy documents and reports drawn up in the name of the Combat Poverty Agency, 28 were done by outside bodies, while ten were done by the agency itself. There is very good expertise within the agency at research level and other levels. These experts will now be able to avail of the good expertise in the Office for Social Inclusion. By integrating these two bodies, which is the recommendation in the review, we can strengthen their roles.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Minister filed the report——
Acting Chairman: We will move on to Questions Nos. 95 and 97.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: A Chathaoirligh, I am entitled to ask a supplementary question.
Acting Chairman: I am sorry; we are out of time.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The report was commissioned through the Minister’s Department——
Acting Chairman: Questions Nos. 95 and 97.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The next question deals with it anyway.
Acting Chairman: I am sorry, Deputy; we were out of time.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Acting Chairman let the Minister go on.
95. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the progress made on the reform of rent supplement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39390/08]
97. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will report on the welfare reforms proposed in the programme for Government for the rent supplement scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39416/08]
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I propose to take Questions Nos. 95 and 97 together.
The purpose of the rent supplement scheme is to provide short-term income support to eligible people living in private rented accommodation whose means are insufficient to meet their accommodation costs and who do not have accommodation available to them from any other source. In recent years, a significant number of people have come to rely on rent supplement for extended periods. There are currently more than 69,700 people in receipt of rent supplement, almost 32,000 of whom have been receiving a supplement for 18 months or more. For this reason, the rent supplement scheme must be viewed in the context of overall housing policy, particularly in the case of long-term recipients.
[520]I am anxious that all avenues are explored in providing support for those on long-term rent supplementation, including options to support them in securing a home. One of the measures introduced to address this is the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, which gives local authorities specific responsibility for meeting the longer-term housing needs of people receiving rent supplement for 18 months or more on a phased implementation basis. Since 2005, more than 15,800 rent supplement recipients have been transferred to RAS units and other social housing options. The commitment in the programme for Government to the development of a mortgage support system is also being advanced in the context of housing policy, with provision being made in the new housing Bill for an incremental purchase scheme. This scheme will enable existing social housing tenants and households qualified for social housing support to become owners of houses newly built by housing authorities and voluntary and co-operative bodies.
The Department of Social and Family Affairs provides income maintenance support through the mortgage interest supplement scheme. This scheme assists eligible people who are unable to meet their mortgage interest repayments and contributes to the interest portion of the mortgage repayments only. Almost 7,000 people are now in receipt of a mortgage interest supplement.
With regard to the commitment to review the rent supplement scheme and the associated means test, significant changes in the means test for rent supplement were implemented in 2007. Where a person working up to 30 hours per week has additional income greater than the standard weekly rate of supplementary welfare allowance, the first €75 of such additional income, together with 25% of any additional income above €75, is disregarded for means assessment purposes. This ensures that those returning to work or participating in training schemes are better off as a result of taking up such an opportunity. A person accepted as having a long-term housing need under the RAS may engage in full-time employment and still qualify for rent supplement.
Rent supplement is calculated to ensure that an eligible person, after payment of rent, has an income equal to the rate of supplementary welfare allowance appropriate to his or her family circumstances, less a minimum weekly contribution which each recipient is required to pay from his or her own resources. When last set in 2004, the minimum contribution represented approximately 10% of the minimum social welfare weekly payment rate. While social welfare payments have risen by nearly €70 per week since then, no upward adjustment has been made to the minimum contribution. As part of budget 2009, I announced my intention to increase the minimum contribution from €13 to €18 with effect from 1 January 2009. This will represent 8.8% of the basic social welfare weekly payment and will significantly reduce the differential between the contribution paid by rent supplement tenants and the contribution payable under the local authority differential rent scheme.
The fact that more than 69,700 people are receiving rent supplement and the fact that more than 50,000 rent supplements have been awarded since the beginning of this year indicate that the scheme is effective in meeting needs. However, I intend to keep the rent supplement scheme under review, and the Department will continue working closely with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in ensuring that RAS meets its objective of catering for those on long-term rent supplementation while enabling rent supplement to return to its original role of a short-term income support.
Acting Chairman: I remind Members that in ordinary oral questions there is one minute for each supplementary question and one minute for each reply.
[521]Deputy Olwyn Enright: I welcome the fact that changes are to be made in the legislation to enable people to purchase houses in voluntary schemes. That is important. I do not know whether the Minister read the Focus Ireland submission on housing last week. The main problem with the rent supplement scheme is that the capping levels do not reflect the market value, particularly in certain areas. We all know of many cases in which people are topping up payments to their landlords to give a total rent in excess of the rent supplement. People are either asking their landlords to sign the form on that basis or losing accommodation because they cannot get their landlords to sign on that basis. This needs to be adjusted. I appreciate the Minister does not want to drive up the price of rent, but an adjustment is required. I ask the Minister to ensure this is dealt with in the review because it is causing people difficulties. If one cannot pay a month in advance, the landlord will go to somebody else who can give that payment straight up. That is the second matter that must be urgently adjusted. I will not go into the quality issues because I will not be allowed.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The Deputy put her finger on it when she said it is important we do not drive up the rent. When we examined the rent limit in August, rents had fallen by 5% and the supply of rental accommodation had doubled. Given the number of tenants who come under this scheme, there is always a danger that our raising the limits would drive up rent. The fact that so many people benefit from it shows that it is in some way right. We will re-examine it at the beginning of next year. I do not want to be the driving force behind the market on this. One third of private sector tenants in the country are on rent supplement, so it is a very significant driver in the market. We hear anecdotal evidence of people who have built office blocks and want to convert them into accommodation suitable for rent supplement, but we do not want to ghettoise people on rent supplement. In the current market landlords are very glad to get tenants, particularly given how the supply has doubled.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: What is the Minister at regarding rent supplement? The budget provided for very meagre increases in social welfare, approximately 3%. For most people, apart from pensioners, that amounted to €6.50 per week. For people on rent supplement there is a clawback of an additional €5 per week, which means people on welfare in private rented accommodation on rent supplement get a net €1.50 per week from this budget. How can the Minister justify that? In real terms it represents a cut in the income of many welfare recipients. How does she expect those people to survive when already low levels of welfare payments will be cut in real terms in the coming year? How can those people survive?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: As I clearly stated, the rent contribution has not gone up in a number of years. It is entirely reasonable to expect somebody to pay €18 per week when the State pays anything up to €1,200 in some cases on their behalf, depending on family size etc. That €18 per week is much less than those same people would pay if they rented from the local authority.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: They would be in that house for life.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Increasingly the Government is anxious to try to bring it into line with some of the differential rents at local authority level. Some of those are, for example, €26 or €27 per week. When the levels were set in 2004, it was designed to be at approximately 10% of the social welfare rate and, having stayed the same over the last number of years, the new levels are only 8.8%.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: That is not what I asked.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Therefore it is entirely reasonable to expect people to do that.
[522]Deputy Arthur Morgan: Is the Minister aware of the great difficulty in which many low-income families are placed by side deals — under the table payments, as described by Deputy Enright a moment ago — which are put in by landlords? Is she aware that this is a consequence of what she is doing? Would she accept that the €400 million paid annually in rent supplement is money squandered because of the Government’s inaction throughout the boom years to deal with the social housing crisis and the approximately 43,200 families languishing on housing waiting lists?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: No, I am glad to see that so many people are able to benefit from the scheme. The fact of more rental accommodation becoming available should help keep the prices down. The rent supplement budget for next year is €462 million. There is pressure on that due to the number of people losing their jobs. Approximately 72,000 people will benefit from it. It is a lot of money but given that 72,000 people are being housed for it, it is a good recognition of how the Government is trying to respond to people’s difficulties. Deputy Enright already mentioned the new housing scheme introduced through the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The RAS scheme, which did not work well in all local authorities for a while, is now operating effectively in all local authorities. I would hope to see more successes from that and to see people transferring from the rent supplement into RAS units or, more important, into social or other voluntary housing.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: I would be slow to describe this scheme as successful. Is it successful because all other Government housing policy has failed? There should never be this many people seeking rent supplement if alternatives were available. The Minister reiterated my point about market value. The Focus Ireland submission deals with that quite well by discussing its being a percentage of the market value and not the full market value, so its position paper had an opportunity to ensure rents did not increase in an area. As a review is ongoing, will this be taken into account? Last year we discussed the same points with the then Minister, Deputy Cullen, and it went ahead as it always does every year, in fact more negatively because of the increase for the tenant. It is one thing to pay for a local authority house when one knows one can stay in it for the rest of one’s life. It is another matter to pay that rate for temporary accommodation that is often of very poor quality.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: We are anxious to do something about the poor quality accommodation and I am working with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on that. As a result of the supply of rented accommodation some of it is of very good quality for people’s €13 per week to date and €18 in future. The rent limit must be kept under review and I will re-examine it probably at the beginning of next year to ensure it is reasonable for people to be able to get accommodation in particular areas at particular rates.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: There is a need for some joined-up thinking on the Minister’s part. Arising from the budget and the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, welfare recipients in private rented accommodation on rent supplement are getting an increase of a mere €1.50 per week on their welfare as a result of the clawback in rent supplement. There is no basis on which the Minister can defend that kind of meagre increase. I ask the Minister to reconsider this action, which will drive more people into severe poverty. Does the Minister want to preside over such a situation? The clawback on rent supplement is indefensible and I ask the Minister to reconsider her actions.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is entirely defensible to ask people to pay €18 per week for their accommodation.
[523]Deputy Róisín Shortall: No, I am talking about the Minister’s actions which will result in the clawback on their meagre social welfare increase.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is entirely defensible on the basis that the changes introduced last year allow people to work. It is important that there should be no disincentive to people going to work. Many people on rent supplement will have additional income. If, in February, those same people were housed in Limerick in rental accommodation, they would pay €26 per week and in Dublin city €24.87 per week.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The Minister should get real, open her eyes and see the poverty around her.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: No wonder the Combat Poverty Agency was abolished.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: That is the differential rent rate in those two counties. It is substantially more than we ask anybody to pay at €18. It is reasonable. In hindsight it should have increased every year between 2004 and 2008, and it did not, so that is what it has come to.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Is it entirely reasonable to give people an increase of €1.50 per week?
96. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way the inclusion of the Combat Poverty Agency with the Office for Social Inclusion will proceed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39381/08]
121. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way she will safeguard the future independence of the Combat Poverty Agency. [39504/08]
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I propose to take Questions Nos. 96 and 121 together.
As Deputies will be aware, the Government’s decision to integrate the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion within my Department was informed by the findings of a review of the Combat Poverty Agency, which was undertaken on foot of a Government decision of 6 June 2007. As the Combat Poverty Agency is established under statute, legislative changes will be required to alter its status. I intend to bring proposals in this regard to the Government in advance of Committee Stage of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008. I do not intend to absorb the Combat Poverty Agency into the Office for Social Inclusion in its existing form. A new strengthened division, which will make the best use of the considerable experience and expertise of the staff of both existing bodies, will be created. The new organisation, which will seek to address the weaknesses in both bodies which were identified in the review, will provide a stronger voice for those affected by poverty and social inclusion issues. An implementation plan has been formulated to provide for the smooth integration of the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion over the coming months. The detail of the plan will be developed with the expert input of the staff of the agency and the office. It will take account of the findings of the review, particularly relating to the potential of the integrated division to strengthen the performance of both bodies in the areas of research and data.
I am conscious of the concerns about the need for independent scrutiny of public policy that have been expressed by some interest groups. I agree that independent critique is important. This measure is not intended to reduce the scope for such work. As the review report notes, the function of independent reporting on poverty does not depend on the Combat Poverty Agency as much as it did in previous years. This is due to the emergence of other independent [524]data sources such as the statistics on poverty reported by the Central Statistics Office and the independent analysis provided by bodies like the Economic and Social Research Institute, the National Economic and Social Council in Ireland, the European Union and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development overseas. Ireland is well served by the social partners and a wide range of non-governmental organisations and other groups which have a strong voice in the public debate on poverty and related issues. I intend to ask the new division to prioritise the development of procedures to ensure the views of these and other stakeholders, including people experiencing poverty, continue to be available to the Government as it develops and monitors social inclusion strategies.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The role of the Combat Poverty Agency is to draw together the results of its own research and the research conducted by the other bodies mentioned by the Minister. It gives that research an independent voice. It is able to point out the good and bad aspects of Government policy. The failure of the Combat Poverty Agency lies at the door of the Government and its actions over the last 11 years. In an earlier response, the Minister said that the agency’s input was not good.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: That is what the review said.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Its input was not good because the Government, including the Minister and her predecessors, did not listen to what the agency had to say. Its input would have been good if the Government had actually done something about what it said. Does the Minister realise that the word “poverty” was not mentioned in the terms of reference which were drawn up for the review she is so fond of quoting? How does the Minister intend to ensure the Combat Poverty Agency will be independent when it comes under the Department of Social and Family Affairs? Having listened to how the Minister has answered questions on this matter in the House today, I am more aware than ever of the importance of the agency. The Minister does not appreciate what it is like for people in poverty.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: A wide range of groups can make an input into all Government policies. Over many years, successive social welfare Ministers have participated in the pre-budget forum, in which 32 groups express their views. That is a direct input into Government policy.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Government ignored all of the forum’s recommendations, with the exception of a recommendation relating to disability.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The community and voluntary pillar makes a direct input into Government policy. The established mechanisms which are in place work very well.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: That is from the Minister’s perspective.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I would like to mention the various elements of the Office for Social Inclusion, particularly the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion, which is chaired by the Taoiseach.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: It has not met since February.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: That committee has examined a wide variety of issues, such as the best way of combatting poverty.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: It has not met since February.
[525]Deputy Róisín Shortall: It has not met for almost ten months. Does it still exist?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The senior officials group works on a cross-departmental basis. A number of Departments have sections dealing with social inclusion.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The Combat Poverty Agency was able to draw that all together.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: When I worked in the Department of Education and Science, the Department’s social inclusion unit drove the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools initiative, which successfully combatted disadvantage.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: That initiative has been cut back in the budget as well.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Mechanisms and procedures are in place to provide information. The Combat Poverty Agency will enjoy the best possible future if it is integrated with the Office for Social Inclusion.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Can the Minister tell us how much she expects to save by gagging the Combat Poverty Agency in this manner?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Nobody is gagging anybody.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: How much does the Minister expect to save as a result of this move?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I answered that question earlier when I mentioned the figure of €4.6 million, which is how much has been spent on the Combat Poverty Agency.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: That is not what I asked.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is obvious that the staff will be transferred.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: I asked the Minister to say how much she expects to save.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: It is obvious that negotiations will take place with the staff. We intend to enhance the amount of research we do. That is important. I intend to ensure we have a strategy, mechanism or forum in place to ensure the voices of those who are experiencing poverty are listened to and heard on a regular basis.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Can the Minister stop talking for a second?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I envisage——
Deputy Róisín Shortall: Can she answer my question?
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I ask Deputy Shortall to allow the Chair to determine who is called to speak.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: How much does the Minister expect to save as a result of this move?
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I envisage that we will spend more money in some areas, such as research, and far less money in other areas, such as advertising and consultancy.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: I ask the Minister to answer the question I asked. How much does she expect to save by shutting down the Combat Poverty Agency, as it is currently constituted?
Deputy Olwyn Enright: She does not know.
[526]Deputy Mary Hanafin: I have indicated to the Deputy that as soon as we have made the final plans and arrangements——
Deputy Emmet Stagg: No answer.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: It is clear the Minister does not know.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I expect to spend a lot more money on some of the more relevant things, such as research.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: The decision to close the Combat Poverty Agency was a political one.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: We will not pay for more advertising and more consulting.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: It was clearly a political decision.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: The aim of the review, which has been ongoing for a year and a half, is to ascertain the best mechanism for ensuring the voice of poverty can be heard. This was the recommendation.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: The word “poverty” was not even mentioned in the terms of reference of the review.
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 Seymour Crawford — the urgent need to review the concerns raised by Protestant fee-paying schools in response to announcements made by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, following the 2009 budget; (2) Deputy James Bannon — the closure of Connolly Barracks in Longford; (3) Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin — the need for the Minister for Health and Children to revisit the fundamentally flawed community child care subvention scheme; (4) Deputy Joe Costello — the need for the Minister for Education and Science to ensure that the Centre for Deaf Studies, Trinity College Dublin, 40 Lower Drumcondra Road, Dublin 9 is adequately funded; (5) Deputy Martin Ferris — the increase in the rate of unemployment in County Kerry in the past 12 months; (6) Deputies Kieran O’Donnell and Charles Flanagan — gangland crime in Limerick; and (7) Deputy Jimmy Deenihan — the construction of a bypass for Castleisland, County Kerry.
The matters raised by Deputies Martin Ferris, Kieran O’Donnell, Charles Flanagan and James Bannon have been selected for discussion.
Deputy Enda Kenny: I begin by offering my sympathy and the sympathy of the Fine Gael Party to the family and friends of the late Mr. Shane Geoghegan, who was gunned down at the weekend. I also offer sympathy to his sporting colleagues in Garryowen FC, and to the people of Limerick. I propose to nominate Fine Gael’s spokesman on justice, Deputy Charles Flanagan, to represent the party at Mr. Geoghegan’s funeral tomorrow.
The murder of Mr. Shane Geoghegan is another example of an attack on this State. It is an attack on democracy and a challenge to our democratic system. The reaction to this killing reminds me of the waves of revulsion and anger that swept the country following other incidents [527]in the past. I refer to the deaths of John Morley, Henry Byrne, Jerry McCabe, Donna Cleary and a number of others who were gunned down in the line of duty or as innocent bystanders. I was a member of the Government when a challenge arose as a result of the murder of Veronica Guerin. I know what that Government decided and did, and I know what the consequences were for the perpetrators of that crime.
I welcome the Taoiseach’s meeting with the Garda Commissioner, who brought him up to date on the activities of his members and the situation regarding resources. However, the Government response to this latest atrocity has been too bland and too easy. This is a war which the Taoiseach does not appear to be winning. I have offered assistance from this side of the House on previous occasions and do so again. How does the State propose to respond to the murder of Shane Geoghegan, an outstanding citizen and sportsman of his native city, who was gunned down in a case of mistaken identity following an execution order delivered by an individual or individuals?
The Taoiseach: I offer my sincere sympathy and that of the Government to the family of Shane Geoghegan and to all his relatives and friends. This was an appalling murder which showed a contempt for the value of human life on a scale that reminds us, as in previous murders, of the wanton killing certain people are prepared to perpetrate in our community. It will be met with the full force of the law, within the law. Quite rightly, significant legislative proposals have been enacted with the support of the House in every effort to provide, at the request of the Garda during the period referred to by the Deputy, whatever powers it deemed fit. That will continue.
In the discussion between the Garda Commissioner, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and myself this morning, the Commissioner confirmed he will continue to lead the Garda in the fight against those who perpetrated such an act, the full rigours of the law and resources available to him will continue to be applied and no stone will be left unturned to bring to justice those who perpetrated this callous crime.
I assure the House that, in every way possible, the Government will provide whatever assistance it can to the Garda and we will rely on the advice and judgment of the Commissioner and his police officers in that effort. The Commissioner is with the investigating team this evening and he will be available to the press to give the operational details of how the Garda will continue to deal with this threat and, specifically, with those who perpetrated this heinous crime. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and I indicated our preparedness to do whatever we can to assist in any way it asks us to in addition to the powers available to it currently. The Garda Commissioner pointed out the powers made available to it enables it to continue the fight against organised crime through the setting up of the organised crime unit, the continuation of Operation Anvil and the provision of all resources necessary to deal with this as a priority in terms of what the Garda does. He has our full support in that effort.
Deputy Enda Kenny: That does not deal with the matter. The Taoiseach said no stone will be left unturned, no lack of resources will apply, there will be no legal restrictions and we will operate within the measure of the law. Everybody supports the Garda Commissioner. The House previously heard comments such as “the sting of a dying wasp” and “a watershed in Irish legal and criminal history” and we had five years of “zero tolerance”. This is not a threat, as the Taoiseach said, because it has happened and nothing can bring back Shane Geoghegan. He was murdered, reputedly by somebody from outside on an execution order delivered by an individual or individuals involved in gangland war. This is a war and there is no point talking about threats. These people have no regard for human life, Irish society, the Government or our democracy. Treating them with an easy hand and a bland response is not good enough.
[528]I would like to ask a number of questions about the legislative and operational frameworks the Garda is required to use in following through on the business of bringing criminals to justice and seeing that they go before the courts and, following the decision of the courts, to prison. First, is the Taoiseach happy with Part 7 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 in so far as it deals with gangs and gangland activities? The legislation contains a serious section dealing with the issue of gangs, membership of gangs, the consequences of membership and so on. Second, is the Taoiseach in a position to send out a clear message to those who commit murder and who are subsequently convicted that the minimum sentence should be at least 20 years?
Third, will he bring before the House, as a matter of urgency, the unfinished work of the previous Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, dealing with the business of covert surveillance and the use of information obtained by such surveillance as evidence in bringing prosecutions? Prevention is much better than looking for convictions after a serious incident such as this. Fourth, why has the State not provided for a DNA database, when clearly we are at least a decade behind in the use of such technology, which is helpful in bringing criminals to justice?
Fifth, the Taoiseach will be aware of the gross extent of community intimidation where it applies. It is absolutely unfair to expect people to give witness identification at parades where they must face those who may be centrally involved. Why have we not come to a point in Ireland where one-way mirror systems are used, as apply in most other jurisdictions where witnesses do not have to fear intimidation when face to face identification is given? The previous five questions lead to the sixth. If the Taoiseach is not happy, does he see a situation where the Government will have to return to Special Criminal Courts to deal with this activity?
The Fine Gael Party will support the Government in so far as provision of resources, legislative changes and operational moves are concerned, which will see to it that persons who carry out crimes such as this, or who order that such crimes be carried out, are brought before the courts and justice delivered to them through the courts system and that they be implemented fully. A clear message should be sent out to those people. They have no respect for the Taoiseach, his Government, the people of Ireland or for human life. I offer our sympathies to the Geoghegan family. Let this be the end of it. Let us not have any more words about stings of dying wasps or watersheds or zero tolerance. This is a war; win it.
The Taoiseach: The Geoghegan family is dealing with the tragic loss of a partner and son. The House is united in its determination to deal with this matter and it joins in sympathy with the family. The House recognises the nature of the challenge put to the criminal justice system by certain elements in our society and we will continue to fight those people with the full rigours of the law to the greatest extent we possibly can in this democratic society. We are agreed on that and none of us is suggesting that one of us is more determined than the other on that point.
I refer to the questions raised by the Deputy. Section 72 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 provides, as he said, that a person who participates in, or contributes to, any activity of a criminal organisation is guilty of an offence attracting a maximum penalty of five years. We are satisfied, as is the Garda Commissioner, that he can operate those provisions, as enacted. A question has been raised by the Deputy and Deputies from the area regarding the possible parallel of using the same situation as applied under the Offences Against the State Act in respect of subversive offences in the Special Criminal Court. The courts have already held in case law in cases involving the Offences Against the State Act that the opinion of a chief [529]superintendent is not conclusive and it is up to the court to decide how much weight should be given. In practice the Special Criminal Court has tended to disregard such evidence if the accused denies membership on oath. In other words, the basic point to be made is that, constitutionally, one can not escape the requirement, according to the courts, of corroborative evidence in addition to any belief that a Garda officer, however well respected and professional, may have in respect of his or her opinion of an accused’s activities.
Legal advice is that in the case of a trial by jury, allowing evidence of opinion by a chief superintendent that a person is a member of a criminal organisation would amount to a statement without evidence that the accused is guilty would lead to evidence as to the bad character of the accused. This would be so prejudicial that it could not be countered by any direction by the judge to the jury and such a provision would in fact probably be unconstitutional as it would not allow a fair trial. These are the parameters in which we must operate.
We will do all we can to improve the efficacy of this legislation. We will do so working with the Garda Commissioner, at his request, on his advice and in respect of anything that we can do to assist beyond that point. It is important to make the point that we will do whatever is possible in that regard consistent with the Constitution.
On the question of covert surveillance, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform indicated that the heads of the Bill will be brought to Government next week. We will seek, arising out of the approval of the heads of the Bill and as a matter of priority, detailed provisions under the criminal justice legislation.
With regard to the DNA database, €80 million is being provided in next year’s Estimates to provide for the forensic laboratory and improved DNA database that would ensue as a result. Legislation in that regard is being prepared as well.
The question of witnesses coming forward in terms of the witness protection programme is ongoing. There have been many advances made in this matter regarding inferences to be drawn on the right to silence. All of these provisions have been enacted in this House. We have also an Act, which has withstood court challenge, on the question of where people have given written statements and subsequently, for whatever reason one can surmise, were not prepared to proceed with giving verbal evidence in court. The ability of the judge to rely on the written statements to secure the conviction has been upheld.
These are important new provisions in criminal justice legislation, enacted in both the 2006 Act and 2007 Act, which have brought results which otherwise would not have perhaps secured convictions without that new legal basis for so doing.
I repeat that the Garda Commissioner has our full support in whatever matters, in terms of operational and legislative requirements, that he considers he may need. He made the point today that he has the armoury of that working and effective legislation behind him, even though that in no way detracts from the immediate requirement of identifying those who perpetrated this murder and bringing them to justice, and he will do so with the full rigours of the law.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I join the Taoiseach and the leader of Fine Gael in offering my sympathy and that of the Labour Party to the family, friends and sporting colleagues of Shane Geoghegan. His death was shocking and tragic and the manner in which it was carried out was disgusting.
It would be tragic if it was a once-off but, unfortunately, it is not. Shane Geoghegan’s murder is one of a series of murders that have been carried out in similar circumstances — people who were mistaken, who were not in the right place or whatever. Ms Donna Cleary, Mr. Anthony Campbell and others were killed by these murder gangs.
[530]It seems that we have two problems here. The first is that we have many gun murders. Since 1998 there have been 161 gun murders in this State and only 22 convictions. In other words, there is a one-in-eight chance of being convicted of a gun murder.
When I raised this point previously it has been suggested that it is because it takes a while for these cases to come to court. According to the figures before me, in 2003 there were 20 gun murders and only two convictions and in 2005 there were 23 gun murders and only three convictions.
The reality is the people committing these gun murders are getting away with it for a variety of reasons, including the fear that they instill in communities, in witnesses, in other members of the gang etc. We have a situation today where one can pick up the newspapers and read who was the intended victim of this killing on Saturday night last. One can read the identity of the gang that carried it out, the names of some of the members of the gang, and the whereabouts or a suspected whereabouts of some of them. The public wants to get a sense that these gangs will be smashed, put out of business and got off the stage as far as society is concerned. They are a menace and a threat to people in this country going about their ordinary business.
I will not make a political or a partisan issue out of this. I agree with the Taoiseach that there is unanimity across this House about getting this dealt with, but I found his response to Deputy Kenny somewhat defeatist. We do not want to hear the reasons certain things cannot be done. We need to see, led by Government, which my party will support in this, definitive measures taken that will solve and address this problem.
Previously, the Labour Party put forward suggestions such as the introduction of legislation on electronic surveillance and the putting of the witness protection scheme on a statutory basis. We had suggested making membership of gangs a criminal offence and the Taoiseach mentioned the section of the existing legislation which deals with this, but to my knowledge nobody has been convicted of gang membership. Perhaps the Taoiseach will state when he is responding how many people have been charged with membership of a gang under that legislation and if it is not sufficiently robust to deal with the matter, then perhaps we need to look at it again. There are provisions, for example, in the Offences against the State Act, which require people to account for their movements. To what extent is that being used?
I would like to hear a little more about the outcome of the Taoiseach’s discussion today with the Garda Commissioner and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. We need to hear from Government what additional legislative measures are required which will be reasonable and effective in dealing with this problem and what operational measures will be required in terms of the Garda, the Criminal Assets Bureau or the agencies of the State dealing with it. We need to have a sense that at the end of this exercise these gangs will be smashed and an end will be put them, and that we will not see any more of Saturday night’s type of murder.
The Taoiseach: There is nothing defeatist about the approach of the Government to this matter. I am simply pointing out, as we must point out in terms of information to the House, what is achievable within the Constitution and what is not. We must point that out. That is not being defeatist.
Deputy Jim O’Keeffe: He could change the Constitution.
The Taoiseach: There is nothing being excluded from the consideration of the Government as to what it can do in this situation to deal with this matter. Let me be clear about that.
Deputy John Deasy: We deal with this every year.
[531]An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: This is Leaders’ Questions.
The Taoiseach: In fairness to Deputies who support the Garda, it is wrong to suggest that the Garda is not having many successes in this area. It is. As we all will be aware, there are many situations which never come into the public domain by reason of the work being done in preventing serious crimes. Hundreds, not tens, of people from that area who have been involved in crime are behind bars since Operation Anvil began. Hundreds of firearms were taken out of the equation as a result of the work of the Garda Síochána. Murder detection rates in the mid-west region compare very favourably to anywhere else. This is despite the fact that we know there is a culture among a small group of people in the area who have a propensity to violence, hatred and gangland activity. In fairness to the people of Limerick who are at the front line, there is a recognition of the increased visibility of gardaí and the effectiveness of the work of the officers there who conduct their efforts against these people. This in no way suggests that anyone is complacent and acknowledges that any incident where a fatality occurs is unacceptable.
A great deal of work is being done as a result of effective professional policing in the emergency response unit and the special resource units available for the region, the excellence of the people who deal with this on an ongoing basis and the number of convictions, perhaps not specifically with regard to section 72 but with regard to criminal offences, successfully prosecuted in the courts and people put behind bars. This continues to happen and I assure the House the Commissioner is determined with regard to this matter and he made the point that this type of activity was one of his priority issues on becoming Garda Commissioner. He has an excellent record in this area.
We have co-ordination between the emergency response unit, regional units, the national centre for criminal investigation and the CAB, in which the Commissioner had experience in the past and has expertise, and the machinery of the law is being brought to bear in every possible way to try to deal with this situation. The House should be assured that in standing here none of us is defeatist about this issue. All of us recognise the threat to our way of life that this activity represents. All of us recognise that this is a priority area for the provision of resources and it will continue to be regardless of the economic situation because we must deal with it. Behind it all is the pernicious drugs industry and trade and every citizen must recognise that anyone involved either as a user, supplier or trafficker contributes to this culture with which we must contend and defeat.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I accept entirely that the Garda Síochána is doing its best and it has the full support of the Labour Party. I acknowledge that it has had some successes and the Taoiseach identified some of them. This is not a uniquely Limerick problem.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Many of these murders have been in other parts of the country. What can be done to increase the level of convictions being achieved? One out of eight convictions for the gun murders we have seen over the past decade is not satisfactory or acceptable. If the perpetrators of this crime can be effectively identified in newspapers this morning why can they not be lifted and put away?
With regard to existing legislation dealing with membership of a criminal gang have any convictions been achieved? To my knowledge there have not. Has anybody been charged under the legislation? If not, why have charges not been brought under the legislation? Does the Government have plans to introduce additional legislative measures before the House to deal with the problem of gang warfare, criminality and murder? Will the Taoiseach provide the [532]House with specific information on what will be done to deal with the problem following his meeting with the Garda Commissioner today?
The Taoiseach: It is important to point out that the number of murders involving firearms in 2007 was 18 and it was 27 the previous year. To date this year there have been 19 deaths by shooting. Homicide offences have reduced by more than half during the third quarter and almost by half year on year. This is not to suggest that the problem is solved but it does suggest that the law enforcement agencies of the State are being successful in many respects.
Apart from investigating crime, to have interdiction before a crime is committed intelligence gathering and the availability of information is required. As with every other crime, people have information about this which could and would be helpful if they were prepared to make it available in a confidential or other basis to the gardaí who are investigating this murder. This is a fact.
In addition to the specialised units and the specific operations geared and targeted towards organised crime figures we also have a continuing emphasis on community policing and the increased visibility of gardaí on the streets to assist in building up a rapport with the community so people will provide whatever information they have however marginal they think——
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: They are afraid to do that.
The Taoiseach: There are instances where fear has played a part and legislative measures have been taken by this House which have successfully withstood court and legal scrutiny to overcome situations where people were not prepared to give oral evidence on the basis of previous witness statements they had made. This House has responded in ways which were effective.
As to what will happen on the lifting of suspects, I assure the House that every possible effort will be made in the investigation of this heinous crime to follow up any lead, speak to those whom it is felt have knowledge of the issue or who raise suspicion. This morning, the Commissioner assured me and the Minister in so far as he can that the investigative effort will be insistent, widespread and as far as he is concerned will have a successful outcome. This is the determination of everybody involved in the issue.
With regard to further legislative measures, we have the covert surveillance Bill and forthcoming legislation on DNA. On intelligence gathering we rely on the judgment of professionals in this area. This work is ongoing and must be allowed to continue in a way which does not open up to those who are being targeted the opportunity to discover in what way they are being covered and how the surveillance is taking place. We need to find a balance between allowing the Garda Síochána to collect evidence in a way which will withstand legal scrutiny in the courts and, at the same time, get on with policing on a day to day basis so we have community support — as we have in this country thanks be to God — for the gardaí in the work they do on our behalf.
We have armed units, unarmed units, specialised units, increased resources and ring-fenced resources. We have 24 hour surveillance seven days a week of many of these organised figures. Everything possible is being done to see in what way people can be brought to justice for the crimes they commit. What happened is a tragedy as is the fact that we cannot guarantee something similar happening in the future. Unfortunately, this is the society in which we live because of the contempt for life that some in this country have. The law enforcement agencies will be given every assistance. I have confidence in the leadership provided by the Garda Com[533]missioner, senior officers and those on the ground not only in Limerick but in other areas where this phenomenon is prevalent in an effort to deal with the situation.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Before coming to the Order of Business I propose to deal with a number of notices under Standing Order 32. I propose to call the Deputies in the order in which they submitted notices to my office.
Deputy Charles Flanagan: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, the threat posed to society by organised criminal gangsters, as highlighted by the death of an innocent citizen, Mr. Shane Geoghegan, in Limerick at the weekend — the 17th so-called “gangland” murder this year alone and the 128th professional hitman assassination since May 1997; the death and destruction being visited on communities in Limerick, Dublin and throughout the country as a consequence of the activity and behaviour of ruthless drug gangs and organised criminals; and the urgent need for the Government to respond in a direct and meaningful way.
Deputy Dan Neville: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, the need to increase the annual funding made available to the National Suicide Prevention Office from €3.05 million to €10 million for the introduction of the recommendations of the expert group on suicide prevention as outlined in the report, Reach Out, and in view of research, going back as far as 1929, which has repeatedly found that suicide rates increase in times of recession and depression and that there are higher rates of suicide among the unemployed.
Deputy James Bannon: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, the fact that Ireland has the lowest reporting rate of sexual assault or rape in Europe as a result of the Government’s failure to provide localised sexual assault treatment units, despite finance being ring-fenced in budget 2006 for new units to be opened in Mullingar — which was promised before Christmas — and Galway and others updated, including the unit in Letterkenny, to provide the necessary forensic testing for legal proceedings to be initiated.
Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of local and national importance, namely, the need for the Minister for Transport to make an urgent statement to the House on the looming strike action at Aer Lingus and to ensure that all possible industrial relations mechanisms of the State are immediately utilised to facilitate the resumption of talks, with the aim of avoiding at all costs serious disruption for the travelling public in the busy pre-Christmas period and the appalling impact of the proposed massive job cuts on the Aer Lingus workforce given rising levels of unemployment in north and west Dublin, the mid-Leinster region and in Shannon and the mid-west.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, the need, following the brutal and savage murder of Shane Geoghegan in Limerick early Sunday morning, for an emergency debate in the Dáil today on tackling gangland crime in Limerick, with the Taoiseach outlining to us in detail the contents of his and the Minster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform’s discussions with the Garda Commissioner on this matter and what specific Garda resources, legislative and other measures will be put in place immediately to tackle this crisis.
[534]Deputy Arthur Morgan: I seek the adjournment of the Dáil under Standing Order 32 to discuss a matter of national importance, namely, the need for the Minister for Health and Children to apologise to the House for misleading it last week when she denied in reply to a parliamentary question that she had received a copy of the report into the circumstances of the death of Tania McCabe and her baby son at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital when, as was stated by a representative of the Health Service Executive in a statement to the “Loose Talk” programme on LMFM radio on 7 May 2008, the Minister received a copy of the report when it was made public; the need for the Minister to explain why she denied receiving the report; the need for her to explain why, if she did not receive the report as she claims, she did not seek a copy of the report; the need to explain why she told lies to me in this matter and why she had so little interest in the case that she does not even know whether she received a copy of the report——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: As the Deputy knows well, that is not in order and cannot remain on the record of the House. I ask the Deputy to withdraw the accusation that lies were told in the House.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: It is not an accusation, it is a fact. I can show the Leas-Cheann Comhairle the evidence.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy knows the Standing Order well.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: I have the evidence here that the Minister told lies.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy knows he is not allowed to make such an accusation. I ask him to show respect for the Chair and withdraw the accusation.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: I do not want to argue with the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, who is generally fair and impartial.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Will the Deputy withdraw his remark? That is a requirement of the House.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: I will not deny what the Minister has done. I will withdraw nothing.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy must either withdraw the unparliamentary accusation against a Member or he must leave the House. A charge can only be made by substantive motion, and the Deputy is welcome to take that course if he so wishes. However, it is not allowable to make that charge against a Member of the House.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: There has been a lot worse happening in the north east——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy will either withdraw——
Deputy Arthur Morgan: ——where report after report is sitting on the shelves and the Minister is neither implementing them nor doing anything about them.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy may not shout down the Chair. He must withdraw the accusation or else leave the House.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: That is a far greater offence than breaking the rules of the House.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I ask the Deputy finally to withdraw the accusation.
[535]Deputy Arthur Morgan: It is a fact, not an accusation.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Will the Deputy withdraw the accusation?
Deputy Arthur Morgan: I will withdraw nothing. It is a fact.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: In that case, I ask the Deputy to leave the House.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: The Leas-Cheann Comhairle should ask the Minister for Health and Children to leave her position.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy will leave the House.
Deputy Morgan withdrew from the Chamber.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Having considered the matters raised, they are not in order under Standing Order 32.
The Taoiseach: It is proposed to take No. 2, Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. and business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m. Private Members’ business shall be No. 40, motion re cervical cancer vaccination programme.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: There is one proposition to put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed to?
Deputy Róisín Shortall: No. The Labour Party is opposed to the Second Reading of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 on two counts. First, the time allowed for the debate is completely inadequate, with a guillotine tomorrow evening. Second, and more importantly, in view of the severity of the cuts contained in the Bill and the extent to which these cuts target the unemployed, children, the poor and people with disabilities, the Labour Party is opposed to the Second Reading of the Bill.
Deputy Enda Kenny: At the Whips’ meeting, the Fine Gael Whip proposed that the Bill should not be guillotined.
Deputy Emmet Stagg: The Labour Party made the same proposal.
Deputy Enda Kenny: However, a guillotine is proposed for 10 p.m. tomorrow. We can either have a vote now or tomorrow. I am opposed to the taking of this Bill by way of guillotine. It contains many changes to the social welfare regime on which all Members will wish to contribute. I am opposed to the Second Reading on the basis of the proposed guillotine.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I join with colleagues in opposing the proposition to guillotine the Second Stage debate. While it is not referred to in today’s Order Paper, it has been signalled that we will face a guillotine. Members will not have the opportunity fully to participate in the address of this legislation. Therefore, there is no option for the Opposition but to oppose the proposal.
Question put: “That the proposal for dealing with the late sitting be agreed to.”
[536]The Dáil divided: Tá, 70; Níl, 59.
| Tá | |
| Ahern, Dermot. | Ahern, Michael. |
| Ahern, Noel. | Andrews, Barry. |
| Ardagh, Seán. | Aylward, Bobby. |
| Blaney, Niall. | Brady, Áine. |
| Brady, Cyprian. | Brady, Johnny. |
| Browne, John. | Byrne, Thomas. |
| Calleary, Dara. | Carey, Pat. |
| Collins, Niall. | Conlon, Margaret. |
| Connick, Seán. | Cowen, Brian. |
| Cregan, John. | Cuffe, Ciarán. |
| Curran, John. | Dempsey, Noel. |
| Devins, Jimmy. | Dooley, Timmy. |
| Fahey, Frank. | Finneran, Michael. |
| Fitzpatrick, Michael. | Fleming, Seán. |
| Gallagher, Pat The Cope. | Gogarty, Paul. |
| Gormley, John. | Grealish, Noel. |
| Hanafin, Mary. | Harney, Mary. |
| Haughey, Seán. | Healy-Rae, Jackie. |
| Hoctor, Máire. | Kelly, Peter. |
| Kenneally, Brendan. | Kennedy, Michael. |
| Killeen, Tony. | Kirk, Seamus. |
| Kitt, Michael P. | Kitt, Tom. |
| Lenihan, Conor. | Lowry, Michael. |
| McDaid, James. | McGrath, Michael. |
| McGuinness, John. | Martin, Micheál. |
| Moloney, John. | Mulcahy, Michael. |
| Ó Fearghaíl, Seán. | O’Brien, Darragh. |
| O’Connor, Charlie. | O’Dea, Willie. |
| O’Flynn, Noel. | O’Hanlon, Rory. |
| O’Keeffe, Batt. | O’Keeffe, Edward. |
| O’Rourke, Mary. | O’Sullivan, Christy. |
| Power, Seán. | Ryan, Eamon. |
| Sargent, Trevor. | Scanlon, Eamon. |
| Treacy, Noel. | Wallace, Mary. |
| White, Mary Alexandra. | Woods, Michael. |
| Níl | |
| Bannon, James. | Barrett, Seán. |
| Breen, Pat. | Broughan, Thomas P. |
| Bruton, Richard. | Burke, Ulick. |
| Burton, Joan. | Byrne, Catherine. |
| Carey, Joe. | Clune, Deirdre. |
| Costello, Joe. | Coveney, Simon. |
| Crawford, Seymour. | Creed, Michael. |
| D’Arcy, Michael. | Deasy, John. |
| Deenihan, Jimmy. | Doyle, Andrew. |
| Enright, Olwyn. | Feighan, Frank. |
| Flanagan, Terence. | Gilmore, Eamon. |
| Hayes, Brian. | Hayes, Tom. |
| Higgins, Michael D. | Hogan, Phil. |
| Kehoe, Paul. | Kenny, Enda. |
| McCormack, Pádraic. | McGrath, Finian. |
| McHugh, Joe. | McManus, Liz. |
| Mitchell, Olivia. | Naughten, Denis. |
| Neville, Dan. | Noonan, Michael. |
| Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín. | O’Donnell, Kieran. |
| O’Dowd, Fergus. | O’Keeffe, Jim. |
| O’Shea, Brian. | O’Sullivan, Jan. |
| Penrose, Willie. | Perry, John. |
| Quinn, Ruairí. | Rabbitte, Pat. |
| Reilly, James. | Ring, Michael. |
| Shatter, Alan. | Sheehan, P.J. |
| Sherlock, Seán. | Shortall, Róisín. |
| Stagg, Emmet. | Stanton, David. |
| Timmins, Billy. | Tuffy, Joanna. |
| Upton, Mary. | Varadkar, Leo. |
| Wall, Jack. | |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan; Níl, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg.
Deputy Enda Kenny: I refer to the Taoiseach’s comment on legislation dealing with covert surveillance. The Taoiseach told the House the heads of the covert surveillance Bill will be discussed by the Cabinet next week. Will the Taoiseach indicate when the Bill will be published? I realise it must be circulated first to various Departments. Does the Taoiseach envisage it will return in the spring for publication?
In the Taoiseach’s absence last week the House agreed to hold a 90-minute debate on the cervical cancer vaccination programme. As a result of the situation arising from the murder of Mr. Shane Geoghegan, will the Taoiseach set aside 90 minutes for a debate tomorrow to allow the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to update the House on the Government’s position, especially on the provision of assistance to the Garda? Perhaps a series of questions would be in order given the seriousness of the tragic situation that obtains.
The Taoiseach: As I stated during Leaders’ Questions, the Cabinet expects the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to bring the proposed covert surveillance Bill to the Cabinet next week. Thereafter, detailed drafting must take place and I cannot indicate to Deputy Kenny at this stage what the timeline will be. Given the previous discussion, we will accord priority to it and ask the Attorney General to work through the issues with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform as quickly as possible. To be fair to the Department, it has historically been very good at bringing forward legislative proposals in a timely fashion, despite the complexity of some of the issues with which it must deal. This is a complex issue and there are public policy matters involved.
I have no problem with holding a debate this week arising from the murder of Mr. Geoghegan and on crime generally. However, I am conscious that a funeral will take place tomorrow. Perhaps the Whips could meet on Thursday to discuss the possibilities. There was an indication that a discussion on the reports of the European Union (Scrutiny) Bill 2001 would be held and perhaps this could be deferred.
Deputy Enda Kenny: It would be helpful if 90 minutes were set aside for this purpose. Deputy John Perry brought to my attention the importance of several of these reports and a debate lasting 90 minutes is not long enough to discuss the Lisbon treaty and related matters. I thank the Taoiseach for his reply and I would be pleased if statements, including questions and answers, could take place during that 90-minute allocation on Thursday.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Some weeks ago I asked the Taoiseach about the promise made by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to introduce legislation to limit spending for candidates in local elections. I suggested there was an opportunity to use the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008, which is before the House, to introduce that provision. The Taoiseach subsequently wrote to me indicating that the Government’s preferred route for introducing a cap on spending limits in local elections was the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008. The Bill is on Committee Stage and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has circulated ministerial amendments, but there is no amendment dealing [538]with spending limits. What are the Government’s intentions to place a cap on spending limits for local elections and when will the necessary legislative proposals be brought forward?
The Taoiseach: The Government is deliberating on the detail and the best way to proceed. While it may have been the original intention to incorporate the provision as an amendment to the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008, it will not now be incorporated. The matter is subject to continued deliberation. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will introduce further proposals based on these discussions. The Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008 is not the means through which it will be done.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: That is difficult to understand. This is not a complicated legislative matter and there are precedents related to general and European elections. I do not know the nature of the ongoing discussion, unless the Taoiseach wishes to share it with the House.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We cannot go into that matter on the Order of Business.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The local elections will take place next June and people need to know in advance of the elections if there will be spending limits and what they will be.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: It is in order to ask about legislation.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: This is about the timing and the presentation of the legislation. The elections are coming, when will we see it?
The Taoiseach: I do not mean to be facetious, but we will introduce the legislation before the local elections if we are to have it.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I thank the Taoiseach, but will we have it before people place their post box orders?
The Taoiseach: I am trying to be helpful. We did not introduce such legislation previously for local elections because they are a different type of election. Under the current arrangement for European and general elections, there are spending limits and repayment arrangements. It is not as simple as some people suggest. We do not want a situation to develop where there is an unfair burden on local election candidates. There is a need to work out the detail and examine how it could be done in a way that does not cause as big a problem as the one it seeks to solve.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I join the leaders of the Fine Gael and Labour parties in expressing my outrage and condemnation at the outrageous and tragic murder of Mr. Shane Geoghegan in Limerick in the early hours of Sunday morning. I join in the extension of sympathy to his family and friends. We are in need of sound legislation compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights to enable the Garda and the Director of Public Prosecutions to build solid cases against gangland criminals. Is there any legislation under consideration other than the already flagged covert surveillance Bill to address the scourge that these gangland criminals have visited on many of our major cities and larger population areas?
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Is there particular legislation about which the Deputy wishes to ask?
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: I refer to an unrelated but equally important matter. On the programme for Government, the alleged basis on which the Government operates, given that [539]the three component parts thereof are no longer in situ, with the signal demise of the Progressive Democrats who helped to negotiate it, that none of the three leaders who negotiated the programme — Deputies Bertie Ahern, Mary Harney and Trevor Sargent — is any longer a party leader and that we have a very new and very different situation economically, socially and politically throughout the jurisdiction in these straitened economic circumstances, does the Taoiseach accept that the programme for Government is no longer applicable? What is required is a realistic addressing of the need for a new programme for Government. Will the Taoiseach recognise the need to negotiate a new programme? Will he accept the advice of all parties in the development of such a programme, which would be appropriate to the present situation?
The Taoiseach: When drafting legislation we must take cognisance of the constitutional and international obligations and imperatives that apply. The need to give sufficient consideration to such matters is imperative, so that subsequent legislation is not struck down in the courts, where it is not effective because of court challenge or by way of legal argument. The accommodation of these public policy considerations mean that such legislation can take some time to draft.
The programme for Government outlines our priorities quite clearly, and how we must work within responsible public finance provisions in order to achieve those. All commitments in any programme for——
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Was other legislation being considered? I understand that time is required in its preparation, but I have asked a simple question. Is legislation other than the covert surveillance Bill, already addressed here today, being considered by the Government in the context of these serious matters?
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy can only ask about specific legislation. If he wants to ask a general question, he should table a parliamentary question. I call Deputy Bannon.
Deputy James Bannon: Approximately 40 jobs have been lost in Longford-Westmeath——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Will the Deputy come to a relevant question on the Order of Business?
Deputy James Bannon: Yes, it will be very relevant. These jobs have been lost since Fianna Fáil and Deputy Peter Kelly closed Connolly Barracks.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: That is not relevant to the Order of Business.
Deputy James Bannon: Has the Government any legislation planned that can counteract the adverse effects of high business costs, as well as the cost of petrol and diesel? These costs are driving people out of business right across the country, especially in the midlands.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Is any legislation promised in that area?
The Taoiseach: That was dealt with in the financial resolutions to the budget.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: It is a matter for the budget debate.
[540]Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I move: “That Second Stage be taken now.”
Deputy Róisín Shortall: On behalf of the Labour Party, I oppose the taking of Second Stage of this Bill. It provides for savage cuts on the most vulnerable people in our society, and it deliberately targets the poor, the unemployed, children and people with disabilities.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: Fine Gael also wishes to oppose the Bill, due to the cuts involved, but also due to the intention of the Minister for Social and Family Affairs to introduce amendments on Committee Stage two days after the Bill’s publication. She made a decision on the abolition of the Combat Poverty Agency, but that has not appeared in what has been brought before the House to date.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 68; Níl, 60.
| Tá | |
| Ahern, Dermot. | Ahern, Michael. |
| Andrews, Barry. | Aylward, Bobby. |
| Behan, Joe. | Blaney, Niall. |
| Brady, Áine. | Brady, Cyprian. |
| Brady, Johnny. | Browne, John. |
| Byrne, Thomas. | Calleary, Dara. |
| Carey, Pat. | Collins, Niall. |
| Conlon, Margaret. | Connick, Seán. |
| Cowen, Brian. | Cregan, John. |
| Cuffe, Ciarán. | Curran, John. |
| Dempsey, Noel. | Devins, Jimmy. |
| Dooley, Timmy. | Fahey, Frank. |
| Finneran, Michael. | Fitzpatrick, Michael. |
| Fleming, Seán. | Gallagher, Pat The Cope. |
| Gogarty, Paul. | Gormley, John. |
| Grealish, Noel. | Hanafin, Mary. |
| Haughey, Seán. | Healy-Rae, Jackie. |
| Hoctor, Máire. | Kelly, Peter. |
| Kenneally, Brendan. | Kennedy, Michael. |
| Killeen, Tony. | Kirk, Seamus. |
| Kitt, Michael P. | Kitt, Tom. |
| Lenihan, Brian. | Lenihan, Conor. |
| Lowry, Michael. | McDaid, James. |
| McGrath, Michael. | McGuinness, John. |
| Moloney, John. | Ó Cuív, Éamon. |
| Ó Fearghaíl, Seán. | O’Brien, Darragh. |
| O’Connor, Charlie. | O’Dea, Willie. |
| O’Flynn, Noel. | O’Hanlon, Rory. |
| O’Keeffe, Batt. | O’Keeffe, Edward. |
| O’Rourke, Mary. | O’Sullivan, Christy. |
| Power, Seán. | Ryan, Eamon. |
| Sargent, Trevor. | Scanlon, Eamon. |
| Treacy, Noel. | Wallace, Mary. |
| White, Mary Alexandra. | Woods, Michael. |
| Níl | |
| Bannon, James. | Barrett, Seán. |
| Breen, Pat. | Broughan, Thomas P. |
| Bruton, Richard. | Burke, Ulick. |
| Burton, Joan. | Byrne, Catherine. |
| Carey, Joe. | Clune, Deirdre. |
| Costello, Joe. | Coveney, Simon. |
| Crawford, Seymour. | Creed, Michael. |
| D’Arcy, Michael. | Deasy, John. |
| Deenihan, Jimmy. | Doyle, Andrew. |
| Enright, Olwyn. | Feighan, Frank. |
| Flanagan, Terence. | Gilmore, Eamon. |
| Hayes, Brian. | Hayes, Tom. |
| Higgins, Michael D. | Hogan, Phil. |
| Kehoe, Paul. | Kenny, Enda. |
| McCormack, Pádraic. | McGinley, Dinny. |
| McGrath, Finian. | McHugh, Joe. |
| McManus, Liz. | Mitchell, Olivia. |
| Naughten, Denis. | Neville, Dan. |
| Noonan, Michael. | Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín. |
| O’Donnell, Kieran. | O’Dowd, Fergus. |
| O’Keeffe, Jim. | O’Shea, Brian. |
| O’Sullivan, Jan. | Penrose, Willie. |
| Perry, John. | Quinn, Ruairí. |
| Rabbitte, Pat. | Reilly, James. |
| Ring, Michael. | Shatter, Alan. |
| Sheehan, P.J. | Sherlock, Seán. |
| Shortall, Róisín. | Stagg, Emmet. |
| Stanton, David. | Timmins, Billy. |
| Tuffy, Joanna. | Upton, Mary. |
| Varadkar, Leo. | Wall, Jack. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan; Níl, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I now call on the Minister for Social and Family Affairs to move the Second Stage reading.
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I move: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.”
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I ask the Minister to wait until I have called the House to order. Deputies who wish to have conversations should do so elsewhere.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: Tá an-áthas orm an Bille seo a chur os comhair an Teach. The legislation will implement the €515 million package of social welfare improvements announced in budget 2009. In very difficult economic circumstances this package will bring total expenditure on social welfare in 2009 to €19.6 billion, which is an increase of €2.6 billion or 15.5% over the Estimates allocation for 2008.
At a time when public expenditure must be tightly controlled, this increased provision for social welfare is a clear signal of the Government’s commitment to protect the vulnerable and less well-off in society. The budget provides for increases of between 3% and 3.8% in the basic social welfare payments next year. These increases are above projected inflation for 2009 and so will broadly maintain the real value of these payments. They are also in line with the wage rises agreed by the social partners in the second phase of the national pay agreement. The schemes and other supports which the Department of Social and Family Affairs administers will benefit over 1.7 million people, including 440,000 pensioners, 345,000 ill and disabled people, more than 80,000 carers, 30,000 low income families availing of family income supplement and more than 580,000 families who receive child benefit payments.
[542]The budget includes provision for an average live register figure of 290,000 in 2009. This compares to an average of 216,490 in the ten months to October this year and an expected average of 220,000 for 2008 as a whole. Providing for the expected increase in the live register alone accounts for €1.25 billion of the planned increase in spending for 2009.
In these extraordinary economic times, the Government has had to make some difficult decisions in order to secure our economic future. However, we have still made provision for an increase of €2.6 billion in social welfare expenditure next year and have kept expenditure control measures in this Department to an absolute minimum. I will now outline to the House the improvements in payment rates which will be given legislative effect in the Social Welfare Bill.
As regards older people, we are all aware that the price of fuel is an issue of major concern for many people but particularly for the elderly and the ill. I am pleased that the budget provides for an 11% increase in the value of the fuel allowance, bringing it to €20 a week from next January. The duration of the fuel season is also being extended by another two weeks from April 2009, bringing it to 32 weeks in total. These improvements to the fuel scheme will cost almost €30 million extra in 2009 and will benefit nearly 300,000 households.
The budget also provides for increases of €7 per week in the maximum personal rates of payment for State pension contributory and State pension transition from the start of January 2009. This will bring the new weekly rate to €230.30. The State pension non-contributory is also being increased by €7 per week bringing the new rate to €219 per week from January 2009.
While providing for increases in the State support for today’s pensioners, the Government is also conscious of the need to develop a new long-term pensions framework to serve future generations of pensioners. I am pleased to be able to inform Deputies that we are close to the end of a very protracted policy review of issues in this whole area which started with the publication by the Pensions Board of its national pensions review and its report on mandatory pensions, Special Savings for Retirement, just over two years’ ago. A Green Paper on pensions was published this time last year allow the debate encompass all aspects of pensions policy in this country. We completed a very successful consultation process at the end of May and to which some Deputies made submissions. We received a wide range of suggestions covering all possible avenues of reform with at one end of the spectrum, an earnings-related pension operated through the social insurance system, and at the other end, a continuation of the existing voluntary arrangements with enhanced tax incentives. While there is a general acceptance that we need to reform our pensions system, no consensus on the way forward has emerged.
The results of the consultation process are probably not that surprising and in the absence of an agreed approach the Government is now proceeding to devise a policy for the future of our pensions system. It bears repeating that there is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to pensions. If we want a good system we will have to pay for it, whether it is organised through the social insurance system or by way of the private sector. The challenge is to strike the right balance between the responsibilities of all those who can contribute, including the State, employers and employees, and to ensure that whatever system is decided upon, the group who are most in need of pensions coverage, the low to middle-income earners. This is the challenge and the aim is to announce a framework for future policy by the end of the year.
With regard to social welfare payments to people of working age, the budget provides an extra €260 million for such schemes. The maximum personal rate of payment for all working-age schemes is being increased by €6.50 per week with effect from the first week of January 2009, with proportionate increases applying to people on reduced rates. This brings the lowest [543]social welfare weekly payments above €200 for the first time to €204.30. The rates of qualified adult payments are also being increased on all schemes by €4.30 except for the invalidity pension scheme where a €4.60 increase will apply. About 733,000 people will benefit from these increases.
Budget 2009 also provides increases for families with children who are in receipt of social welfare payments. Social welfare-dependent parents currently receive an extra €24 a week for each child on top of their basic social welfare payments, through what is termed the qualified child increase. This is being increased by €2 to €26 per child, with effect from January 2009.
Improvements are also being made to the family income supplement which is paid to low-income working families. The income limits for the FIS are being increased by €10 a week in respect of each child, giving an average extra payment of €6 per child a week. It is estimated that a total of 29,000 families will benefit from FIS in 2009 and that approximately 2,000 additional families will become eligible for a FIS payment.
The income thresholds for entitlement to back to school clothing and footwear allowance are also being increased to enable 18,000 more families to benefit from the scheme. The Government decided in budget 2009 that with effect from January 2010, child benefit will no longer be paid in respect of children who are 18 years of age. This change is being phased in gradually and the Bill provides that a half-rate payment of the appropriate rate of child benefit will be made in respect of existing and future qualifying 18 year olds from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009.
Special alleviating measures are being introduced in respect of children aged 18 years who are in social welfare-dependent families or low-income families. A compensatory payment of €15 per week will be paid to families in receipt of social welfare payments which include a payment for a qualified child in this age group and to low-income families in receipt of family income supplement which include qualified children in this age group. This additional payment will also be applicable where an 18 year old is in receipt of disability allowance in his or her own right. Compensatory payments will be paid to the person who was receiving the child benefit for the 18 year old in question. In addition, the back to school clothing and footwear allowance will be increased by €215 to €520 per annum for eligible 18 year olds. These compensatory payments will cease on 31 December 2010.
While policy in relation to the early child care supplement is the responsibility of the Minister of State with responsibility for children, the Social Welfare Bill will provide the legislative basis for the change to the scheme as announced in the budget. The cost of the early child care supplement in 2009 is expected to be €397 million. The primary aim of the scheme was to help parents with the cost of preschool child care. The payment was introduced for children to the age of six, even though most children start school well in advance of their sixth birthday and the burden of having to pay for full-time child care ceases at that point.
The approach taken in 2005 was the most generous possible, to ensure that no child would lose the payment before starting school; however it is now considered that a more targeted approach is consistent with the current economic context. With effect from January 2009, the eligibility period for children qualifying for the early child care supplement will be reduced from six years to five years and six months. The supplement will also be paid on a monthly rather than a quarterly basis as at present. The combined effect of these measures is expected to result in savings in the Department of Health and Children Vote of some €93 million in 2009.
I will outline the changes being made to certain social insurance schemes. Deputies will be aware that Ireland’s social welfare system is based on two different types of entitlement: a social insurance system for people who have paid sufficient PRSI contributions and a social assistance system for people without adequate contributions who have little or no household [544]means of their own. Social insurance is intended both to enable people to insure themselves against adverse life events such as unemployment or illness and to provide for their State pensions and other benefits, through contributions to the national social insurance fund. Social insurance benefits are not means-tested; entitlement depends on having paid the required number of PRSI contributions relevant to the particular benefit being claimed. For the past 11 years the social insurance fund has been in surplus, with more than sufficient income to the fund to cover the payments being made from it each year, without the State having to provide a contribution. However, this is changing. As a result of further increases in the live register, expenditure is expected to exceed income to the fund by over €200 million this year and approximately €900 million next year. Although these current deficits can be met from the accumulated surplus, it seems likely that annual Exchequer subvention to the social insurance fund will be required again within a few years.
In this context it is appropriate to look at some of the instances where people with a very limited or distant contribution record have been able to qualify for very significant benefits, regardless of their household income. Currently, people who have paid just 52 weekly contributions in total can qualify for jobseeker’s benefit, illness benefit and health and safety benefit. This means, for example, that recent migrants or young workers who have only worked here for a total of one year are entitled to claim jobseeker’s payments for 12 months. This will change from next January, when the number of required paid contributions will be doubled to 104 for new claimants.
A further anomaly that exists at present is that some people who were previously working part-time can receive a higher rate of payment from these schemes than what they were actually earning while at work. Again, this is considered to be inappropriate and a disincentive to employment. From next January, therefore, this situation will be addressed by increasing the earnings thresholds which currently apply to the reduced or graduated rates of payment from €150 to €300 per week.
At present, it is necessary to have made 13 paid contributions in the relevant tax year in order to qualify for illness benefit. However, this condition does not exist for jobseeker’s benefit, with the result that people who may not have paid PRSI contributions in the past number of years can qualify. Again, it is considered that this position does not adequately reflect the contribution-based rationale for social insurance and so, from next January, the Bill provides that new claimants for jobseeker’s benefit will be required to satisfy the same conditions as those on illness benefit and must have paid 13 contributions in the relevant tax year to qualify for benefit.
The other two changes being made to jobseeker’s benefit relate to the duration of the payment. At present, people who have 260 or more paid social insurance contributions can receive jobseeker’s benefit for up to 15 months. The Bill provides that, with effect from 15 October 2008, this is being limited to 12 months for current claimants with less than six months duration on the scheme, as well as all new claimants. Where the claimant has less than 260 paid contributions, the maximum duration of jobseeker’s benefit will be nine months instead of 12 if the claimant currently has been in receipt of benefit for less than three months and in respect of all new claimants.
In summary, the Bill provides that new claimants for jobseeker’s benefit will in future have to have paid a total of at least 104 contributions to the Social Insurance Fund, with at least 13 of these paid in the relevant tax year, and the duration of the payment will be either 12 or nine months depending on the number of social insurance contributions they have made in the past. I stress that the people with limited means who will be affected by these restrictions in entitlement to social insurance benefits will be able to claim jobseeker’s allowance or another social [545]assistance payment, such as the supplementary welfare allowance. The maximum rate of jobseeker’s allowance is paid at the same rate as jobseeker’s benefit.
Deputies will be aware that changes to the Money Advice and Budgeting Service and the Combat Poverty Agency were also announced on budget day. The Bill is amending the Citizens Information Acts 2000 to 2007 to enhance the functions of the Citizens Information Board through the assignment to it of responsibility for the provision of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service. MABS staff provide a highly valued service to people who are over-indebted and need help and advice in coping with debt problems. However, it has been recognised for some time that the service needs a proper legislative basis and structure. After detailed consideration, the Government decided that assignment of the responsibilities to the Citizens Information Board would best achieve that outcome. The MABS and citizens information centres complement each other as both are involved in providing information, advice and advocacy services to the public. In addition, the Citizens Information Board has a long association with the MABS at both national and local level and was involved in establishing some of the original MABS pilot projects.
The proposals envisage that the MABS will be a separate and distinct service within the Citizens Information Board. There will be no change in the status of the 53 independent MABS companies with voluntary boards of management, nor in the employment status of their 240 employees who provide the local services. The Bill as published does not contain legislative provisions to give effect to the decision to integrate the Combat Poverty Agency with the office for social inclusion. As I will detail in a few minutes, it is intended to introduce such provisions on Committee Stage.
I will now outline the main provisions of the Bill. Sections 3 and 4, together with Schedules 1 and 2 to the Bill, provide for increases in the rates of social welfare payments. These include an increase of €7 per week for recipients of pensions and carer payments who are aged 66 years and over. The Bill also provides for an increase of €6.50 on all working age payments, including jobseeker’s benefit, disability allowance, one-parent family payment and carers benefit and allowance payable to carers aged under 66 years. It further provides for increases in the allowances payable in respect of qualified adults and qualified children. These increases come into effect in January 2009.
Section 5 provides for increases in the weekly income limits used to determine entitlement to family income supplement. The new thresholds range from €500 in the case of a family with one child to €1,250 in the case of a family with eight or more children. These increases will take effect from January 2009.
Sections 6 and 7 provide for an increase from €50,700 to €52,000 in the annual PRSI earnings ceiling applicable to employees and optional contributors. This amendment comes into effect from 1 January 2009.
Section 8 provides that income from dividends arising from stallion fees, stud greyhound fees and profits from the occupation of certain woodlands will be taken into account in estimating reckonable income for PRSI purposes. This amendment is necessary to disregard the provisions of section 140 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 when estimating reckonable income for PRSI purposes.
Sections 9 to 11 provide for amendments to various definitions. Sections 9 and 10 provide for the amendment of the references to a reformatory or industrial school and medical practitioner which are contained in the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 by replacing those terms with the definitions “children detention school” and “registered medical practitioner”, as provided for in the Children Act 2001 and the Medical Practitioners Act 2007 respectively. Section 11 amends the definition of “widowed parent” in order to provide that the grant will [546]be payable to a widow whose child is born within ten months of the date of death of the deceased spouse.
Section 12 provides for the deletion of a provision which applied to persons who were in receipt of pre-retirement allowance prior to April 1993. This provision is obsolete as all recipients of pre-retirement allowance would have transferred to State pension payments before or during 2004.
Section 13 clarifies that, for the purposes of the one-parent family payment scheme, a “qualified parent” must be the parent, step-parent, adoptive parent or legal guardian of the qualified child. It also provides for continued payment to existing recipients who established entitlement under the current definition of “qualified parent”.
Section 14 provides for amendments to the provisions governing payment of rent and mortgage interest supplement under the supplementary welfare allowance scheme. It provides that the maximum amount of rent supplement will be specified in regulations. It also provides that the amount and duration of mortgage interest supplement will be determined by the Health Service Executive having regard to the circumstances of the person concerned and subject to any conditions and so forth that may be prescribed.
Section 15 provides for a number of amendments to the provisions governing the illness benefit scheme, with effect from 5 January 2009, as follows: the minimum number of qualifying contributions required will be increased from 52 to 104; illness benefit will be payable for 624 days — two years — in the case of a person who has more than 260 paid PRSI contributions; payment will continue where a person has been in receipt of illness benefit on a long-term basis, provided that the claim is not broken for a period exceeding three days; and existing special provision for claimants who participate in reactivation programmes will be maintained.
Section 16 provides for amendment to the provisions governing the health and safety benefit scheme by increasing, from 52 to 104, the minimum number of PRSI contributions required in order to qualify for benefit, and providing that the claimant must have at least 13 paid PRSI contributions in the relevant tax year.
Sections 17 and 18 provide for amendments to jobseeker’s benefit. At present, the social welfare legislation provides for the disregard of certain periods where a jobseeker’s benefit claimant participates in specified training and employment schemes. Section 17 provides for the extension of the linking period in respect of jobseeker’s benefit to two years and six months in the case of a person who is participating in certain vocational training opportunities schemes.
Section 18 provides for a number of amendments to the jobseeker’s benefit scheme as follows: an increase, from 52 to 104, in the number of PRSI contributions required in order to qualify for benefit; a requirement that the claimant must have 13 qualifying contributions in the relevant tax year; amendments to the duration of benefit, namely, 12 months in the case of a person who has paid at least 260 PRSI contributions and nine months in the case of a person who has paid less than 260 PRSI contributions; and special provision for claimants who were in receipt of jobseeker’s benefit on budget day, 14 October 2008.
Provision was made in the Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2008 for the transfer of the administrative responsibility for domiciliary care allowance from the Department of Health and Children to the Department of Social and Family Affairs in 2009. While those provisions have not yet been given effect, section 19 of the Bill provides for amendments to the domiciliary care allowance scheme. These include reflecting the amendment to the definition of children detention school, as provided for in section 9 of this Bill; and providing an increase from €299.60 to €309.50 in the monthly rate of the allowance.
Section 20 contains amendments to entitlement to child benefit by providing that the benefit will be payable in respect of a child up to his or her 18th birthday. It also provides that a special payment of half the standard child benefit payment rate will be payable in 2009 only in respect of qualified children who are currently aged 18 years. Special provision is made to provide for a compensatory payment of €15 per week to families in receipt of social welfare payments, which includes a payment for qualified children in this age group, and low-income families in receipt of family income supplement, which includes qualified children in this age group. This additional payment will also be applicable to persons within this age group who are in receipt of disability allowance in their own right. This compensatory payment measure will cease to have effect on 31 December 2010.
Section 21 provides for a small increase in the rate of early child care supplement to €92 per month to facilitate transition from quarterly to monthly payments. It also provides that payment will be made monthly in arrears rather than on a quarterly basis, and that the supplement will be payable in respect of a child up to the age of five years and six months. These amendments will take effect from 1 January 2009. Section 22 provides for the deduction of any contributions payable under the income levy in calculating weekly family income for the purposes of family income supplement.
Part 3 provides for miscellaneous amendments to other Acts. Amendments to the pension Acts are covered in section 23. It clarifies requirements for the submission of an actuarial funding certificate for new schemes commencing on, or after the date, of transposition of EU Directive 2003 741/EC of 23 September 2005. The amendments also confirm that eight named schemes shall have an effective date for the submission of an actuarial funding certificate of 1 January 2009.
Regarding the Civil Registration Act 2004, section 24 removes the requirement for an tArd-Chláraitheoir to consult with the Minister for Health and Children when giving information to certain specified others. This change is necessitated in the context of the transfer of functions regarding the General Register Office from the Minister for Health and Children to the Minister for Social and Family Affairs.
Part 4, covering sections 25 to 28, inclusive, provides for the proposed transfer of the functions of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service to the Citizens Information Board. The purpose of the measure is to provide that the board will support the provision of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service. It will promote, develop and disseminate information and education about debt, money management and related matters. It will compile and publish data, undertake research and provide the Minister with information and advice on matters related to its functions.
I will be bringing in several amendments to the Bill on Committee Stage. These will include a saver provision, to preserve the duration of entitlement to jobseeker’s benefit for a claimant who transfers temporarily to carer’s benefit or carer’s allowance. There will be a redrafted provision for the revised arrangements applicable to child benefit to more clearly set down the arrangements for the compensatory payment of €15. In anticipation of the transfer of administrative responsibility for blind welfare allowance from the Department of Health and Children to the Department of Social and Family Affairs, an amendment will be introduced to provide for an increase in the rate of the allowance.
An amendment will also be introduced to give effect to the Government’s decision, announced in the budget, to provide for the integration of the Combat Poverty Agency and the Office for Social Inclusion within the Department. It is not my intention that the Combat Poverty Agency will simply be absorbed into the Office for Social Inclusion in its existing form. Rather a new strengthened division will be created which will make the best use of the [548]considerable experience and expertise of the staff of both existing bodies. It will seek to address the weaknesses identified by the recent review of the agency to both. This new division will provide a stronger voice for those affected by poverty and social inclusion issues.
As the Combat Poverty Agency is established under statute, legislative changes are required to alter its status. The proposed legislative provisions will entail the dissolution of the agency and the transfer of the permanent staff, property and assets, any pending legal proceedings and any other liabilities of the agency to the Minister, as well as for final accounts of the agency to be drawn up and for related matters. Arrangements regarding the position of the agency staff will be finalised following discussions with the Department of Finance, the staff and their union representatives. It is proposed legislative provisions will be brought into effect by way of a commencement order to enable the smooth transition for the Combat Poverty Agency and the office for social inclusion to the new arrangement.
Pensioners who are paid by electronic methods will receive their increase in full from January 2009. Increases for recipients of jobseeker’s benefit and allowance, illness and maternity benefit, one-parent family payment, family income supplement, farm assist and supplementary welfare allowance will be paid in full from January 2009. As has been the case previously, because of the lead-in time involved in the production of personal payable orders, recipients of certain long-term payments such as widows and widowers, carers allowance and invalidity pension will receive their increase in mid-February backdated to January along with their new payable order books. Increases for certain other long-term payments such as State pensions and disability allowance will be paid by a special once-off payment in mid-February to cover 12 weeks’ payment to the end of March when new payable order books will be issued.
The Bill will provide the legislative basis for a range of improvements next year. These include €7 extra per week for State pensioners; €6.50 extra per week for welfare recipients of working age, such as jobseekers and those on illness benefit; an extra €2 per week on the fuel allowance, with payment also being made for an additional two weeks; increases in child-related payments to those dependent on social welfare and improvements in the family income supplement for low-income working families; and 18,000 more families becoming eligible for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance.
To fund these improvements, along with making payments to increasing numbers of people on the live register, it has been necessary to make savings in some areas. However, we have kept these expenditure control measures to a minimum. At a time when public expenditure must be tightly controlled the extra €2.6 billion being provided for social welfare in 2009 is a clear signal of the Government’s commitment to protect the vulnerable and less well-off in society.
I commend the Bill to the House and look forward to a constructive debate.
Deputy Olwyn Enright: I do not welcome the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008. Fine Gael will vote against it and table many amendments on Committee Stage to address what it sees as an attack on some of the most vulnerable in our society.
The Government has tried to make a virtue of taking tough decisions and sought the patriotic support of the public to do this. The reality is that it has made harsh decisions which will not solve the economic problems and will hurt those least able to cope with them. People must remember that the Government shoulders a large portion of the blame for where the country finds itself today. It will not be forgotten.
Everyone knows the elderly received several knocks in the budget. The withdrawal and then the partial re-instating of the medical card for the over 70s will never be forgotten. The same [549]applies for the State contributory and non-contributory pensions. The budget increases for welfare rates have been set at between 3.1% and 3.3%. The Government forecasts an inflation rate of 2.5% for 2009. Whether people are willing to accept any of the Government’s forecasts is open to debate. This forecast is, at best, optimistic. Other commentators have suggested an inflation rate of approximately 3% next year. This year’s inflation rate is 4.5% while food and energy costs have increased by far more than the average rate of inflation. Food inflation this year stood at 6.4% while Ireland has among the highest energy prices in the EU.
In September, electricity prices rose by 17.5%, gas increased by 20% and home heating oil has also risen dramatically. Bearing this in mind, for the Government to state that the welfare increases will keep in line with inflation is subjective at best. Pensions should have been increased by at least €10, which Fine Gael stated prior to the budget. Instead, the €7 increase will be wiped out by the increases in VAT, petrol, accident and emergency department charges and the continual rise in cost of food and fuel. This is the same Government that is committed to achieving a State pension of €300 per week by 2012. To achieve this between the next three budgets, the Government will have to provide a total of €70, or an average of €23 a week in each of the next three years.
The Minister likes to point out her Department was one of the few that got an increase in this year’s budget. She fails to remember that the promises made on the rates of increase were not fulfilled. She fails to remember that one of the main reasons for the rise, or the necessity to seek to increase in her Department’s budget, is that unemployment is rising at the rate of one job every three minutes, a far higher rate than in any other European country.
Like the rate of increase in the pension, contributory and non-contributory, the rate of increase in the jobseeker’s allowance and jobseeker’s benefit will do little to help families. When Deputy Richard Bruton outlined Fine Gael’s tough but fair budget proposals to help ensure getting the economy back on track, it addressed the underlying weakness in the economy as well as providing scope for positive action for those most in need. Jobseeker’s payments should have been increased by €9 instead of scapegoating weak and vulnerable people because Fianna Fáil did not manage the public purse for so long.
It is disingenuous of the Minister to pretend her changes outlined in section 18 are to do with ending a dependency culture. They are far more to do with making cuts which will alter the lives of many very vulnerable people.
It is particularly ironic that this decision is being made at a time when employment is becoming harder and harder to find, with 260,000 people on the live register. No longer can the Minister claim that the Opposition is being “a little bit dramatic” when we discuss the live register figures. The solution as outlined in this Bill does not give people any opportunity for further education and training and simply makes it harder for more vulnerable people to access benefits to which they were entitled heretofore.
When the Minister spoke about unemployment last July in the Dáil, she said:
How hollow her words ring now for those real families with real difficulties. Take the employee from APW Engineering in Oranmore who was told last Friday, with his 120 colleagues, that they no longer had jobs. His major concern was where he would get money for his family the following week, as the union representative had told them it might be 12 weeks before they got their entitlements. He and his colleagues had better hope they have the required number of contributions to ensure they are entitled to support for themselves and their families. It is [550]little comfort to him and his colleagues to see the Minister smile and talk about people who have jobs, as though that somehow makes it less painful for those who do not.
Listening to the Minister saying her main priority is to get people into education and training, some people probably thought she had a plan. She does not. In fact, her only plan is to ensure that a young person or migrant who has only worked for one year cannot access social welfare too quickly, that a person cannot get more on social welfare than he or she ever got when working and, if a person is going to start in the social welfare system, that he or she has at least worked in the economy. However, she has no plan to ensure that people have an opportunity to do this. She clearly does not see the poverty traps that sometimes ensure one is better off on social welfare than in low-income employment. Does she realise there are 54,537 people in this country under the age of 25 who are unemployed? She intends, through legislation, to make it even more difficult for these people, yet she gives them no other option.
The changes in the eligibility criteria for jobseeker’s benefit will push more people into applying for jobseeker’s allowance, which is a means tested payment. This will have implications for many people, particularly young people living at home. If a young man or woman, for example, was trying to save for a deposit on a house and did not have the required number of contributions for jobseeker’s benefit, he or she possibly would not satisfy the new criteria when these savings were taken into account.
In addition, what about the Department’s commitment to providing a high-quality service to all its customers, as stated in its own reports? In parliamentary questions we are constantly told that applications are processed and decisions on entitlement issued as expeditiously as possible, yet there seems to be no uniformity in the length of time it is taking to process these applications around the country. We get pre-written, regurgitated answers and there is no change in the timeframe in the particular offices where delays are occurring. For example, the average processing time for jobseeker’s allowance in Ballyconnell is 13 weeks, and in a reply to a parliamentary question it was explained that 102 such applications were awaiting decision in that office. In Trim, the processing time is 15 weeks and there are 282 applications. This is in contrast to Blanchardstown, where the average time for processing was six weeks although they had 536 applications on hand, or Cork where the average time was seven weeks and they had 1,684 applications on hand. Why does the Minister not insist that her Department sort this out and that there are equal practices around the country so that people wait a similar amount of time regardless of where they happen to be from?
The people of APW Engineering in Oranmore will be concerned to know that the average processing time in Galway is 11 weeks for jobseeker’s allowance and six for jobseeker’s benefit. This will be of little consolation to them as they struggle over the coming weeks. Surely there are enough civil servants in the Minister’s Department and other Departments who could be transferred to ensure this work is done. We have heard nothing from the Minister as to how she intends to address these anomalies, and from her previous replies on this issue I am not even convinced that she intends to address them.
The changes in the criteria for illness benefit will also cause similar and undue hardship. There seems to be a notion that as this was not intended to be a long-term benefit, it is acceptable to change it. I accept that it was never intended to be a long-term benefit, but the Minister stood over its evolution into such. The reason for this was the vacuum between the illness benefit and the disability allowance. While illness benefit attracts no secondary benefits, it has filled that vacuum, especially in cases in which people cannot get disability allowance because they are unable to prove that their illness will last for one year.
[551]Much kite flying took place before the budget while the Government was trying to decide where it stood on the issue of universality. It attempted to gauge public opinion by talking about the possibility of taxing child benefit or introducing means testing to the payment, and I hope its members realise they got their answer on this through the medical card debacle.
One in nine children in this country is living in consistent poverty. We must focus on this issue. Fianna Fáil, in addition to paying child benefit, needs to implement a targeted approach to children in need. It is time to examine the introduction of a second tier child payment aimed at those most in need, particularly the 20% of all children who are at risk of poverty and who must be assisted in getting out of these circumstances. The Government’s tinkering with the child benefit system in the budget and this Bill will do nothing to help those in poorer families. I believe the Government clearly realises this and has introduced a compensatory payment measure up to 31 December 2010 in the hope that it will blunt the impact of its decision. However, the fact that it is ignoring the difficulties faced by poorer families in which a child opts to participate in third level education or is still in school after the age of 18 is deplorable. This will make the option of further education more inaccessible to these families after December 2010.
According to an assessment by the Combat Poverty Agency, the combined budgetary changes in respect of child poverty result in an increase of only 2% to 3% in the child income package for welfare dependant children, and it has pointed out losses in respect of children aged 18 and those aged five and a half to six because of the aforementioned restrictions and eligibility changes to child benefit and the early child care supplement. It concludes that these will result in losses of between 20% and 50% in the value of child supports for welfare-dependent children in these age groups — equivalent to between €21 and €38 per week — which will ensure these families remain trapped in poverty. In addition, the Government has ensured that its strategy has become even more bureaucratic.
There are now six different rates of child income support depending on the age of the child and the level of support decreases from a high of €85 to €90 for younger children to a low of €32 for dependent children in the 20 to 22 age category. A survey by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice which researched minimum essential budgets found that households containing older children have income shortfalls of between €44 and €123 per week compared to similar household types with younger children. The Combat Poverty Agency has stated it believes the at-risk-of-poverty rate for older children is 1.5 times that of younger children. I am not sure what was achieved in bringing everyone together before the budget to consider the changes that needed to be made.
While it is not a feature of this Bill, it is important to highlight the scandalous decision by the Government to withdraw funding under the school book scheme for low-income children attending non-DEIS schools, which will result in losses for affected schools of between €25 and €55 per child. While a token gesture was made by widening eligibility for the clothing and footwear allowance, this will be directly negated — even more than negated — by the losses in the school book allowance.
The Government’s decision to increase the threshold for the family income supplement, FIS, by €10 per week from January will only bring approximately 2,000 more families into the scheme, despite the high numbers who are in poverty or at risk of poverty. I received a reply to a parliamentary question today which stated that 26,300 families were in receipt of FIS, yet in 2007 the Department received 36,900 new FIS applications. Some of these applicants were ineligible, but the number making the application shows how many people are struggling out there. The amount by which the band has been widened will not allow for the inclusion of all those who were not able to receive the supplement previously.
[552]I will now deal with the issue of lone parents, or one-parent families. The Minister spoke much over the summer about lone parents being in a welfare trap and I agree with her. However, despite her platitudes, the budget did nothing to assist or change the circumstances of lone parents.
The increase of €8.50 in the one-parent family payment for a family with one qualified child will help keep them treading water and that is all. The €2 increase for qualified children will barely even do that. Last July, the Minister said the fact that we pay lone parent benefit until the child is 22 is no incentive for them to get into steady relationships, marry or get into employment, and that a new strategy is needed on lone parents. Lone parents have heard enough from the Government about them without doing anything to help them. The Minister’s two immediate predecessors also highlighted this issue, but we have yet to see one concrete proposal on how the Government intends to help one-parent families.
In the same interview last July, the Minister also said the Government is strongly pushing support for the family, and that it has responsibility for supporting the family. The Government has not shown it values the family and until it assists lone parents to get out of poverty traps, nobody will believe it either. Pilot schemes in Finglas and Kilkenny for lone parents reported to the Minister some time ago, yet these reports still have not been published and we are none the wiser on how effective the schemes were or how they worked.
Earlier this year, I sought a flow analysis from the Department on lone parent assistance for the past five years. The purpose of seeking this was to ascertain the true position regarding lone parents and to see how many are consistently on this payment and how many come in and out of the system. I was astounded to discover that the Department does not maintain a flow analysis of this system. It knows the number of lone parents who claim and receive the payment but cannot provide any statistical information on when they come off the payment or if they re-enter the system. This is from a Department which spent over €11 million on e-Government related projects last year and intends to spend €9 million on them in the coming year.
I am not asking the Minister to re-invent the wheel in assisting lone parents. There have been successful projects. Organisations in this country have done significant work which has been externally evaluated and published, for example, the new futures project under the equality for women measure, which was published in April of this year. It was a partnership between one family and the local employment services network in six RAPID areas, bringing together the complementary expertise of front line service providers.
One-parent families comprise 18% of all families in Ireland and 85% of them are headed by women. The number, 190,000, has increased by 35,350 since 2002. One is four and a half times more likely to live in poverty if one lives in a one-parent family. The 2006 census showed 36% of lone parents were single, 30% separated or divorced and 29% widowed. A number of issues must be looked at if the Government truly wants to assist one-parent families. Token increases barely in line with inflation show a piecemeal, disengaged and unresponsive reaction to the situation by Government. Introducing facilitators who are supposed to work on a one-to-one basis with lone parents, but appointing only 50 to deal with just under 86,000 lone parents in receipt of social welfare and 260,000 unemployed people, will not deal with this issue.
One parent’s report clearly outlines that the role of a key worker who is based in the relevant community setting is critical to the engagement of some lone parents in moving away from welfare dependency and that this engagement must be sustained at each stage of the service delivery model into the early stages of employment. It also highlighted the critical role played by the project key workers and facilitators in participant outcomes and pointed to the need for [553]ongoing training and development of these staff and the critical role played by the co-ordinator in sustaining and developing inter-agency co-operation. It also pointed to the need for the development of a pre-engaging programme for the hardest to reach clients, addressing a range of information and support needs before progression to the programmes. It also said that the payment of participant costs, such as child care and transport, at a fixed rate directly to project participants is particularly important to enable them to access flexible, local and informal child minding in the absence of community child care facilities.
The Government has not addressed these issues not only in this budget, but in previous budgets. The haphazard way the early child care supplement was introduced does not deal with this in a way that truly allows lone parents to engage in education, training or employment. Had the Government properly introduced this supplement and ensured that the money was to cover the expensive cost of child care in Ireland, it would have saved more than enough money to ensure that the parents of children getting child care in this country would have been able to retain that payment for the full term.
Many people on the live register and working in low paid jobs were extremely disappointed that the Government did not use the opportunity of the budget, and that the Minister is not using the opportunity of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, to change the criteria for the back to education allowance. This is a really important payment, particularly for those in receipt of State payments, to give them the opportunity to return to education. The rules governing it are forcing potential recipients of these payments onto the live register instead of allowing them to continue in employment, at least for a particular period, prior to returning to education.
This was the opportunity and the time to create specific measures to minimise the time people were unemployed and reform the criteria for this allowance. These are the people we need to target with re-training and re-education and to whom we must give opportunities to get back into the workforce. Instead of decreasing the numbers claiming jobseeker’s allowance, the Government’s rules on the back to education allowance, BTEA, are forcing more people onto the live register. Its poor policies have led us into the position we are in and they are ensuring that our unemployment numbers are increasing. The Minister needs to see the reality of this situation.
To claim the full BTEA for third level, one must be claiming a social welfare payment for a full 12 months. In this climate, where people are rapidly losing their jobs and people on the minimum wage are particularly vulnerable, it does not make sense to deny people on the minimum wage the BTEA. The Minister must examine the figures. It is estimated that there is only €1 a week difference between those on a minimum wage and those in receipt of jobseeker’s allowance who get rent supplement and other secondary benefits, such as a medical card. Somebody on the minimum wage earns €1 per week less than somebody on a social welfare payment receiving all the benefits, who receives €347 per week before these changes. What choice does this give someone? As a result of this Fianna Fáil policy, a person who wishes to return to third level education in the hope of increasing his or her skills and employment prospects and ensuring he or she will be able to stay in the workforce in the long term, is being told to quit work and go on the dole to become eligible in a year’s time.
The long term savings as a result of changing these rules are huge because these people will have the opportunity of staying on in the workforce with greatly increased employment prospects and earning potential. They will contribute more to the economy through tax in the long term. The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, has refused to change any of these eligibility criteria. It is a serious and deeply unfair mistake on her part.
[554]Another anomaly in the BTEA system is that if a person does not qualify under the other criteria, he or she can qualify by being in receipt of illness benefit for at least two years. However, if a person fails to satisfy the two year requirement on illness benefit, unless he or she has other qualifying social welfare claims, he or she is not entitled to the allowance. Where is the logic in this? Why is it one year for jobseekers and two years for illness benefit when the person has been out of work anyway, albeit for a different reason?
The Minister is very anxious not to allow people to receive the BTEA if they are out of school only a year or two, but the Minister needs to open her mind to the reality. I have numerous examples, as have other colleagues, of people around the country aged 19 and 20 who have been deemed ineligible for the BTEA and, as a result, have dropped out of the education system altogether with the result that all they are doing is claiming jobseeker’s allowance. They may now discover that they are not able to claim that either. The Minister is failing to solve the problem that they are getting dependent on jobseeker’s allowance and that the criteria are forcing them into this situation, yet there are no alternatives available to some of them. How does this fit in with the promise last July to tackle the worrying increase in under 25 year olds signing on? She said then that now is the time for people to start planning and applying for courses starting in September, yet many who did this found that they had no chance of fulfilling the criteria. The Government claims it does not want a continuing trend where more and more young people start depending on welfare payments as their only income. However, it completely ignores the fact that 22% of those on the live register are the very same young people.
I want to discuss the changes proposed under section 14 to the supplementary welfare allowance, in particular, rent supplement and mortgage interest supplement. Focus Ireland recently published an extremely informative document on the changing context of the private rented sector. Rent supplement, like fuel and energy poverty, is an issue which straddles a number of Departments and seems to continuously cost more without any evaluation of how it can be improved or changed. Some effort has been made with the introduction of the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, but the numbers receiving rent supplement remain relatively constant. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, local authorities, the Department of Social and Family Affairs, the Private Residential Tenancies Board and the Revenue Commissioners all have an extremely important role to play in this regard.
It remains the case that there are problems like low-quality housing and insecurity of tenure at the lower end of the market, despite the establishment of the Private Residential Tenancies Board. Focus Ireland has indicated that there are doubts about the portion of existing private residential units which have not been registered with the board, particularly at the lower end of the market. The Comptroller and Auditor General has made the point that no adequate system is in place to ensure that the ultimate recipients of rent supplement, which is funded by the Department of Social and Family Affairs through the HSE to tenants and then to landlords, pay income tax on it. That absence means there is a serious potential loss to the Exchequer, which is particularly unacceptable in a climate in which the Minister’s many frugal decisions have left many vulnerable people suffering.
I appreciate that rent supplement was originally designed as an emergency intervention. In practice, however, it is a long-term payment to people living in the private rental sector. It is possible that this need will increase. Local authorities have been relying on developers to provide houses through the social and affordable housing schemes. It appears that fewer such houses will come on stream in the immediate term. While it is necessary, in theory, for the amount of rent supplement to be specified in regulations, this House does not always get an opportunity to debate such regulations. It is important that we should have such an opportunity. [555] I do not doubt that people are paying top-ups to their landlords in addition to the rent supplement and the amount stated on their application forms. Focus Ireland has outlined numerous case studies of this type. They prove that people are finding themselves in difficulties.
The entitlement to rent supplement also needs to be examined. While there have been changes in terms of eligibility, there is room for further improvement. It is time for the Minister to examine the possibility of making rent supplement available on a different basis to ensure that the working poor can continue to work without falling into the poverty trap. We need to make it easier for people to remain on social welfare, rather than risk losing their rent supplement payment, when they secure full-time employment. It has been brought to my attention that the fact that rent supplement is paid in arrears, rather than in advance, is putting some people at a disadvantage.
I note the Minister’s statement that it is not necessary to make legislative changes to provide for an increase in the duration of fuel allowance payments. The reality is that token increases have been made. Some 227,000 households in this country experience fuel poverty. In the Combat Poverty Agency’s briefing on the budget, it compared the measures relating to fuel and housing costs in budget 2009. If one compares the combined fuel allowance increase and the general increase for a single person household to the increase — by €5 per week to €18 per week — in the minimum contribution to rent and mortgage supplement, one will observe that these changes, in effect, negate the improvement in the personal welfare rate for the 72,000 households that are in receipt of the supplement. What the Government gave with one hand, it took back with the other. It is a pity the Minister did not provide for the option of receiving fuel allowance in two lump sums, rather than on a weekly basis. This would be particularly important for those with oil fired central heating systems.
I would like to speak about the Government’s decision to abolish the Combat Poverty Agency and to integrate it with the Office for Social Inclusion. Fine Gael has long held the view that far too many agencies are replicating work that could be done by civil servants. I refer to work that should be under the direct control and responsibility of individual Departments and, particularly, Ministers. When Fine Gael examined every State agency, it decided where it would begin to make savings. While the Government took some of the theory of our proposals on board, its practical implementation was different, unfortunately. Rather than looking for duplication, overstaffing and waste, the Government decided to examine those agencies that are directly responsible for commenting on the success or failure of Government initiatives and outlining what needs to be done to protect the most vulnerable people in society. The hypocrisy of the Government is evident when it constantly talks about protecting the vulnerable while doing the opposite. It was no great surprise that the Government decided to amalgamate the Equality Authority and the Human Rights Commission and abolish the Combat Poverty Agency. Each of these bodies has a direct responsibility in terms of commenting on Government policy and protecting those who most need our help in society.
The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, claimed earlier that the Combat Poverty Agency has not been abolished. She suggested that it is merely being subsumed into the office for social inclusion. We have yet to receive clear information on how this process will work. Since its inception, the Combat Poverty Agency has been independent and has had the capacity to advise on anti-poverty policy and develop responses to tackle poverty. The board of the agency has received assurances from the Department that the new division will have a strong anti-poverty focus and will retain the expertise and ethos that has been built up by the Combat Poverty Agency. It is noteworthy that no mention appears to have been made of the independent nature of the agency. The Minister has not spoken about its ability to decide its own focus and tackle the real issues, rather than the pet issues of any Administration. No reference has been made to its role in working with other State agencies and, above all, publishing critiques [556]without the interference of the Government. I do not think anybody believes this crucial independence will be retained when the agency is subsumed into the Department.
The Minister for Social and Family Affairs has dealt with this matter with utter cynicism. I refer in particular to her proposal to introduce the amendments abolishing the agency on Committee Stage. Surely she could have dealt with this issue when the Bill was published last week, rather than cynically and manipulatively waiting until Committee Stage in the hope that it would gain little or no attention. Can the Minister give us any guarantees that the research that will be carried out by the Office of Social Inclusion will have any independence? Can she guarantee us that the new body will be able to work with the community pillar, as the agency has been able to do before now? Can she guarantee us the research that has been carried out will be published? Can she tell us what savings will arise from this measure? Can she tell us how the workers’ transition from public servant to civil servant will work? Can she tell us whether the transfer of undertakings legislation will come into play in this regard? Can she ensure that the State will not lose the expertise of the staff of the Combat Poverty Agency? I refer to people with qualifications and expertise in social policy research, health research, community development and local authorities.
There will be seven vacancies in the agency at the end of the year. The vacancies have been filled with temporary staff only. What will happen to those positions? If the Minister introduces amendments on Committee Stage, she will need to outline exactly how the consultation process will happen. Before the Bill proceeds to Committee Stage, she needs to clarify the accountability frameworks which will be put in place. To put it bluntly, I do not think anyone believes there will be any independence in the office of social inclusion. There has been a lack of consultation on this issue. There is a lack of democracy in the way the Minister is attempting to silence the agency. It is as if the Minister believes she is part of a permanent Government — she does not think anyone should be able to offer an alternative point of view. I do not have time to speak about the issues of carers and pensions, but I will do so on Committee Stage.
Deputy Róisín Shortall: I move amendment No. 1:
The Labour Party is vehemently opposed to the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 on the basis that it contains several cuts which can only be described as savage. The most cynical aspect of the manner in which the Government has dealt with the budget and the Bill before the House has been the campaign it engaged in for a number of weeks in advance of the budget. It engaged in an active campaign of spinning, to the effect that whatever else would happen in the budget, it would protect the vulnerable. It is clear that such comments have been shown to be a complete lie. This budget and this legislation have been set out specifically to target the weakest and most vulnerable sections of society. I do not doubt that the result of this legislation will be the imposition of severe suffering on the unemployed, children, the poor and those with disabilities. It is a shameful Bill, just as it was a shameful budget.
One of the most serious aspects of the provisions of this legislation is the manner in which the Government is proposing to treat those who find themselves unemployed. Having emerged from a period when the Government over relied on receipts from the construction industry and the housing boom in spite of warnings on many occasions of the dangers involved and having concentrated foolhardily on the construction industry, an additional 100,000 people are on the live register compared to this time last year. In addition, those who need to turn to the State for assistance at one of the most difficult times of their lives when, through no fault of their own, they are unemployed will discover the State is not there to provide the safety net they thought it would. It is particularly cruel that the Minister has decided to target those claiming unemployment or jobseekers’ benefit by introducing changes for new claimants, which she will impose on current claimants who had a legitimate expectation that they would be able to claim over a certain period.
She is kicking the unemployed when they are down. They expect to look to her for assistance to help them cope with the traumatic circumstances in which they find themselves as they try to provide for their families at a difficult stage in their lives, but she is kicking them when they are down, which is reprehensible on her part. One can contrast that treatment with the Government’s treatment of the banks in recent weeks. The Government parties have been generous by stepping in to provide them with a safety net at huge expense to taxpayers, yet all they can do is show the cold shoulder to those who find themselves unemployed and target them with cutbacks. It did not have to be like this. It is cynical of the Minister to essentially state in her contribution that at a time when public expenditure must be tightly controlled, she had no choice but to target the vulnerable. That is a lie.
The Government parties had difficult choices about how they would balance the books. They had a number of options which she chose to ignore. My party leader, Deputy Gilmore, has identified a number of different areas in which they should have raised revenue or imposed cuts on people who did well and became multimillionaires over recent years. They left these people unscathed and chose to leave them with their money. Instead, they targeted the weakest and the most vulnerable and the Minister should take responsibility for them because they look to her for income support. She should protect them but she has utterly failed to do so.
The Government could have raised up to €2 billion a year if it had decided to target those who paid little or no tax in recent years. For example, landlords who receive tax breaks worth more than €500 million remain untouched. Property developers can avoid stamp duty and if the Government had closed off that tax dodge, it could have raised €250 million but they remain untouched. More than 8,000 people are in small self-administered pension schemes [558]to which they have contributed more than €500 million, much of it tax free, but they were left alone.
The budget was shameful, as is this legislation, because the Government has gone out of its way to target the most vulnerable. As well as hitting the unemployed, I have many other difficulties with this legislation. For example, it provides for an increase of approximately 3% in most social welfare payments. Inflation is running at 4.3% and food and fuel costs have increased at more than the rate of inflation. An increase of 3% will not enable people to keep pace with inflation. All social welfare recipients will suffer a reduction in the value of their payments. They will receive a paltry increase in the fuel allowance. As Age Action Ireland pointed out, the miserable increase of €2 a week will not even buy a packet of firelighters. There has been no mention of the long promised strategy to tackle fuel poverty. This is a huge problem facing people on low incomes because of their inability to pay the increased cost of fuel and because many live in poorly insulated houses. No progress has been made on producing a strategy in this area.
The living alone allowance was not increased. Additional help has not been provided to this most vulnerable group since 1996. If the payment had kept pace with the consumer price index, it would now be worth €15 per week. Instead, the Minister has chosen, like her predecessors, to ignore the fact that it costs a single pensioner 70% of what it costs a pensioner couple to live. The Vincentian Partnership’s research is valuable in this regard. The Minister has chosen to ignore that it is more expensive for a single pensioner to live than one member of a pensioner couple and that is not recognised in the welfare provisions in the legislation.
More than €1 billion in additional spending will be allocated to pay for new claimants rather than for improvements to schemes or rates. The Minister made a great deal of the increase in the allocation to her Department while conveniently ignoring the fact that the bulk of the additional spend will be devoted to new claimants and will not benefit those dependent on welfare. The welfare package is only half of what it was last year. Overall, it is extremely disappointing.
The proposals relating to the Money Advice and Budgeting Service appear rushed. For example, I could find no reference to financial mediation services run by MABS, which is one of its core services. I wonder whether the proposal has been properly thought through. Perhaps in her reply, the Minister might outline how much will be saved by this measure, where the savings will arise, the potential job losses and the consultations, if any, in which she engaged both with the Citizens Information Board and MABS.
I have serious reservations about the new definition of a “parent”vis-à-vis the one-parent family payment contained in section 13. Departmental officials explained at a briefing that the move is to deal with irregularities in how such a parent is defined, but I am concerned that in trying to include additional categories of parents, others will be excluded. I will come back to this later but I thank the officials for providing a briefing earlier, which was worthwhile.
The Bill, along with regulations, will result in ten principal cuts that will severely affect welfare recipients. I will go through them because it is important that all Members are fully aware of the nature and extent of these cuts. I am tempted to circulate details on them to members of the Government parties, and particularly to their backbenchers, so that they are aware of what their constituents will be complaining about at the start of January when the public realises the extent of the cuts being imposed by the Government and how their entitlements have been restricted. It is important that all Members of the House are fully aware of those cuts so that they can make up their own minds tomorrow night when it comes to voting [559]for or against this Bill, and that everybody is clearly on the record as being aware of the extent of the cuts and either voting for or against them.
The first cut will mean that all future jobseeker payment recipients will receive three months less benefit and will each lose over €2,500 in entitlement. The second cut will mean that several existing jobseeker claimants will receive three months less benefit and will each lose over €2,500 in entitlement. Whatever about the Minister imposing such swingeing cuts on new claimants, I cannot recall a situation where cuts of this extent were imposed on existing claimants. Somebody coming up to his or her sixth month in receipt of jobseeker’s benefit was legitimately expecting, having paid into the Social Insurance Fund and having qualified under the existing legislation, a further nine months’ payments. However, as a result of what Minister is proposing here, such a person will find he or she is only entitled to an additional six months. I cannot remember that happening previously, where people who were already in receipt of a claim found their entitlement cut.
The third cut will mean new applicants, especially those with intermittent work records, will find it harder to qualify for jobseeker’s benefit, health and safety benefit and illness benefit. The fourth cut will mean the entitlement of the sick or people with a disability to illness benefit will be restricted to two years.
The fifth cut will mean more restrictions on how the mortgage interest supplement operates, including the possibility that the duration of the supplement will be restricted by the HSE and a maximum amount set. The sixth cut will mean that welfare claimants who rely on mortgage interest supplement and rent supplement will only receive a net increase of approximately €1.50 per week because of increases in the minimum they must contribute to their housing costs. This is one of the most shameful aspects of the budget. The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, should be seriously embarrassed to be the person introducing a provision whereby a significant number of welfare recipients will only receive an increase of €1.50 per week in the coming year. It is shameful how the Minister could impose such a significant cut in real terms in the welfare payments of the most vulnerable, the poorest, in society.
The seventh cut will mean that fewer people will qualify for the one-parent family payment because of changes to how a single parent is defined. The eighth cut will mean that parents of an 18 year old will lose almost €1,000 in 2009 and almost €2,000 in 2010 and in future years. The ninth cut will mean the parents of a five year old will lose roughly €800 because of the series of changes to the early childhood supplement. The tenth cut will mean low-paid part-time workers, typically the school caretaker, home-help worker or office cleaner, will have their entitlement to the maximum rate of jobseeker’s benefit restricted.
By any yardstick, they are ten savage cuts and ten good reasons to reject this legislation. In short, the cuts mean the Bill will result in increased emigration, in many people finding themselves destitute and in devastation for many dependent on welfare payments. I refer again to what the Minister proposes for those who find themselves unemployed. They will lose out significantly under this Bill and I really do not know what is the justification for that.
The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, is inclined to be flippant. She is relatively new in the Department of Social and Family Affairs, but she has shown no understanding whatsoever for the situation in which people find themselves when they lose their jobs. If she can stand here and tell me it is acceptable that people who find themselves in that difficult situation can afford to lose €2,500, then she is living on another planet. Do people not come to her clinic and explain the difficulties they encounter surviving on the meagre payments available to the unemployed? They certainly come to my clinic and I think they come to most people’s clinics. It is exceptionally difficult for such people to survive. The Minister is saying that not only must they continue to so survive, but that she, through measures proposed in this legislation, will actually reduce [560]their entitlement by €2,500. Similarly, the Bill is particularly vicious in how it treats other categories of people who find themselves unemployed.
Regarding the specific targeting of children in this legislation, a number of the measures are shameful. Earlier, during Question Time, I raised the issue of the proposed cuts to child benefit. The first point is that this year, for the first year in my memory, there is no increase in the amount of the child benefit payment. That is extraordinary. With increases in the cost of living and increasing numbers of families finding it difficult to survive, there is no increase whatsoever in child benefit and, in fact, a serious cut for 18 year olds. As I told the Minister earlier, she has experience of the Department of Education and Science and, of all people, she should know that this will have an extremely negative impact on the participation rates of 18 year olds from poor families.
The Minister will be aware that the financial pressures on 18 year olds, and on teenagers generally, in poor families are extraordinary. Although she knows that in many cases financial pressures drive young people out of education, the Minister has decided in this legislation, and in the budget, that those poor families can afford to be hit to the tune of €38 per week.
During that important year when a teenage child aged 18 from a poor family is struggling to stay in school to do the leaving certificate, the Minister is telling that family she will dock it almost €2,000. On what basis does she think those families can take that kind of hit? I do not know that there is any basis for that decision. That is why I asked her earlier if she had given any consideration to the likely impact of this vicious cut on the participation rates of poor children in second level education. I can only conclude that she has given no consideration whatsoever to it because there is no justification for this vicious cut.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Joe Costello): The Select Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has concluded its consideration of the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008 and has made amendments thereto.
condemns the decision of the Minister for Health and Children to abandon this programme as short-sighted and unjustifiable, and calls on the Minister for Health and Children to immediately reverse her decision.
I wish to share time with Deputies Olivia Mitchell, Catherine Byrne, Joe Carey, Dinny McGinley, Joe McHugh, John O’Mahony and John Perry.
Fine Gael has tabled this motion because we believe we are at a crossroads in terms of how we prioritise and spend our money within our health policy. This reaches to core values in health, namely, the saving of lives and the prevention of illness, pain and death. For background purposes, I mention that HIQA recommended that this vaccination programme go ahead and it produced figures which I put on the record of the Dáil last week. They are worth repeating because they are stark. Of the 7,259 cases of pre-invasive carcinoma type 1 of the cervix, known technically as CIN 1, 2,245 could be averted by the use of the vaccine. Of the 3,515 cases of CIN 2 and 3 which are also pre-invasive but more serious, 1,435 could be averted. More than one third of pre-invasive cancers which require treatment, time off work, distress, worry and anxiety could be averted by the use of this vaccine.
More startling are the facts that of the 200 cases of cervical cancer recorded in 2004, HIQA estimates that 111 could have been avoided as could 52 of the 93 deaths from cervical cancer in the same year. It is a wonder to many people, and to me, that we have been able to develop a vaccine against cancer. It is a dream come true. Now we will not use it because of a Government decision which will seem all the more stark and ludicrous as I speak tonight.
I remind the Dáil and the Minister of the programme for Government which states the Government will:
With regard to recommendations by experts, the members of the national immunisation advisory board are the experts on vaccination in this country. They recommended it and the Minister accepted this recommendation. HIQA conducted a cost-benefit analysis on it and recommended it, which the Minister also accepted because in August she announced the programme. Three months later, the Minister is trying to tell the Chamber and the people of Ireland that she cannot find €10 million out of €16 billion. In fact, it does not involve an amount of €10 million because I understand both companies are prepared to negotiate a deferral of any fees to be paid for the vaccine in the next year. All that is left to pay out of the €16 billion budget is a mere €900,000 because HIQA has put the cost of administration at €30 per dose. Last week, the Minister told the House the amount of the administration fee would be €5 million. However, for 30,000 children, the total is €900,000. Where would the other €4 million go? Is it to the HSE for administration?
I have discussed HIQA and the national immunisation board. Other voluntary organisations are deeply involved with this matter. I met with the Marie Keating Foundation which is incredulous that this will not go ahead. The Irish Family Planning Association cannot understand the [562]Minister’s logic. The Well Woman Centre has expressed on the airwaves its disappointment and lack of understanding as to how the Minister could come to this decision. The European Cervical Cancer Association is equally incredulous that this will not go ahead.
The Minister states she cannot find the money. What about the cash for consultants to the HSE which amounted to €7.9 million last year for PPARS alone? What about the bonuses for the bosses in the HSE? These bonuses would pay for the administration of this. It might not pay for the cost of the vaccine but that can be deferred for a year. What about the redundancies which were discussed in light of the fact that a number of years ago Professor Drumm told us that at least 2,000 people in the HSE did not know what their job was?
Last week, the Minister mentioned that other countries in Europe did not have this vaccination. However, one must travel right across to the other side of Europe to Sweden to find one. They have it 50 miles up the road in Newry in Northern Ireland and we cannot have it here for our children. Why, if it was right in August, is it not right today? On many occasions, the Minister has spoken, sometimes passionately, about putting the patient first. However, her actions are the opposite. A good Minister would prioritise what is important. What is a higher priority than saving a life? Deputy McDaid, a Member of this House and a medical professional like myself, asked the Minister to remove what he described as a death sentence for these children. I ask her to do likewise.
Many decisions have been made but this is one of the worst, ill-judged and ill-thought out in a long time. It is easy to score political points and discuss taking money from the elderly and disabled children. All of these decisions have been reversed. The levy on the low paid has also been reversed as was the decision on the tax deductibility on in-vitro fertilisation. Is the Minister really prepared, for the sake of €900,000, to sacrifice the lives of 52 of our 12 year olds? Is she prepared to see approximately 111 of them suffer cancer and all of the pain and anguish that goes with it?
This is penny wise and pound foolish. HIQA calculates the savings in treatment costs per year due to disease avoided would be €2.7 million and the total cost of vaccination would be €9.7 million. This leaves the net amount at approximately €6.9 million. However, this fails to include the amount of income lost to industry and the Exchequer through people being out of work. This makes it cheaper again. It does not make any sense.
It is not too late for the Minister to put her hand up and admit she made a mistake. As the Minister of State, Deputy Sargent, told me and others at a meeting in Skerries, it was a rushed budget. The Minister rushed in and made a mistake. Sometimes it is great to be determined to carry on regardless and not to be for turning. However, this is when one is right. In this instance, the Minister is wrong. The Irish Family Planning Association, the Marie Keating Foundation and the European Cervical Cancer Association know it, as do we all. The Minister knows it herself and her colleagues on the backbenches know it. Will the Minister show real political courage, swallow her political pride and reverse this clearly wrong and obnoxious decision to remove the right to life from these children and let them live without the fear of at least one cancer?
Deputy Olivia Mitchell: I too urge the Minister to reconsider this decision. I support my colleague, Deputy Reilly, in all he has said. This decision is so irrational and so out of character for the Minister that I can only conclude it has not been afforded the type of rigorous assessment or consideration it merits and which I would generally expect of the Minister.
I was briefly Fine Gael spokesperson on health when the now Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, was Minister for Health and Children. I raised with him on many occasions the failure to roll out the pilot cervical cancer screening programme throughout the population. [563] The pilots were set up when my colleague, Deputy Noonan, was Minister for Health and Children. The issue at that stage was that there simply was not the testing capacity within the State, with some women waiting months for results. I was delighted when the then Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, finally announced that the pilot scheme was to be rolled out nationwide, albeit with testing being outsourced to the United States.
In the intervening years, news of the availability of a new cervical cancer vaccine filtered through to the great excitement of all. For the first time, a cancer could be definitively linked to a virus, and prevention by vaccine was not only possible but feasible. Vaccination programmes have since been introduced in many countries, with a rash of states currently preparing to introduce such programmes. There has been such a strong take-up internationally because vaccination programmes are efficient and effective, representing good medicine and good economics. That is the reason the Minister supported the introduction of such a scheme. She has observed many times that the trend in managing population health is towards prevention, by keeping people healthy, disease-free and out of hospital through vaccination programmes and lifestyle changes, and, when people get sick, early detection through regular check-ups and screening programmes.
Not all vaccines and screening programmes justify population-wide delivery in terms either of improvements in the health of the population or health expenditure savings in the future. However, this is not the case with the HPV vaccine for which there is strong international evidence of its efficiency. It saves lives and can ultimately eradicate the disease. Moreover, it can obviate the need for invasive treatments that may render women who contract the disease incapable of having children. The vaccine is cheap, at a fraction of the cost of one day in hospital, and it will become cheaper over time as worldwide demand increases, as it inevitably will.
As I said, it is good medicine and good economics. This was accepted by the Minister, the Health Service Executive and the medical profession. In August, the Minister considered the introduction of a vaccination programme to be a good idea. What happened in the intervening ten weeks to make it a bad idea? It is not that the Minister was unaware in August of the poor condition of the public finances. She had already been asked by the Taoiseach to identify cuts in departmental expenditure as part of a penal budget. The Minister tackled that job with gusto. Nevertheless, she recognised that this vaccination programme was worth including in the proposed expenditure of her Department. She said at the time that the cost and take-up might cause a delay. However, neither the cost nor the take-up has changed. The Minister did not know then what the cost or take-up would be and she still does not know. Therefore, they cannot be the reason for her change of mind.
Will the Minister explain how this U-turn can be justified? The public demands an answer. If I were the mother of an 11 or 12 year old girl, I would be absolutely incensed at the prospect of the Minister refusing to take action that could prevent the possibility of my child contracting a serious illness that could lead to infertility and even death. The Minister must know that this is how people will react. How much more awful will it be for the Minister when some of the current cohort of 12 year olds develop cervical cancer? It is inevitable that some of them will given the current rate of 200 new cases per year. How could she live with herself? Knowing the Minister as I do, I honestly believe she would be unable to do so. I ask her, therefore, to change her mind.
Within the €16 billion budget for the health service, surely €10 million can be found to save these lives. At the very least, and I am, with great reluctance, offering the Minister something of a get-out clause here, she could make the vaccine available to those 12 year olds whose parents have a medical card and, for everybody else, ensure that tax relief is available at [564]the marginal 40% rate. Many mothers will make sacrifices in order to ensure their daughters are vaccinated.
Deputy Catherine Byrne: As a parent of four daughters, I am constantly reminded of the deficiencies in health services. In my own area, many young people have died through drug addiction, suicide and cancers of all forms. Last week’s announcement by the Minister of the postponement of the commencement of a cervical cancer vaccination programme for 12 year old girls is beyond belief. It is only four months since the Minister announced that the vaccination programme would commence in September 2009. However, she has now discovered she does not have the €9.9 million needed to operate the scheme. How has the Minister, given her many years of experience in the Dáil, allowed this to happen? The health of children is not a budgetary matter. What about the long-terms savings arising from this programme as a result of fewer women requiring hospital treatment for cervical cancer? This is the worst type of penny-pinching.
I welcome the roll-out of the screening programme for young women, but it is not enough. The priority should be prevention, via a vaccination programme. This U-turn represents a major step backwards for young girls, many of whom are unaware of the risks and dangers associated with cervical cancer. It is the eighth most frequently diagnosed cancer in the State, with some 200 new cases diagnosed every year and 70 to 80 women dying from the disease. This vaccine was due to be given to more than 26,000 children between the ages of ten and 12 next September. This would have reduced the risk of these young girls developing cervical cancer by 70%. In the absence of this vaccination programme, deaths will occur which could have been prevented.
As a parent and on behalf of parents throughout the State, I urge the Minister to overturn this decision. The MMR vaccine, the meningitis vaccine and even the flu vaccine have led to significant reductions in those illnesses. The cervical cancer vaccine would have an equally successful impact and cannot be shelved. If the Government fails to introduce this vaccination programme, it will leave the less well-off in our society, who will be unable to afford the approximate €600 it will cost to obtain the vaccine privately, at a great disadvantage. I agree with my colleague, Deputy Mitchell, that the Minister should at least make the vaccine available to medical card recipients. My area of Dublin South-Central contains many pockets of disadvantage where parents will struggle even to afford the increased cost of bringing their children to accident and emergency departments. If the Government has the funding to include luxury drugs such as viagra in the medical card scheme, surely it can manage its finances adequately in order to proceed with a vaccination programme that will save lives.
I can only hope that none of my children develops cervical cancer in the future. It is every parent’s worst fear. This is a short-sighted decision. The Minister, who is highly regarded and has been in the Oireachtas for many years, must reverse her decision.
Deputy Joe Carey: I commend my colleague, Deputy Reilly, on introducing this motion on behalf of the Fine Gael Party. Cervical cancer is the eighth most common cancer in the State, with 240 new cases diagnosed every year and some 100 deaths. The development of the HPV vaccine represents significant medical progress. The Minister gave an assurance to the public three months ago that this vaccine would be provided to all 12 year old girls. Three months later, however, this lifeline has been taken away for no apparent reason other than to save a few euro. It is absolutely outrageous.
The Minister has been in office for a long time but she cannot see that it is her job to save lives, show leadership and make a difference for the public she serves. Here the Minister had [565]an opportunity to do that, but she has removed that possibility. This vaccine can save the precious lives of young women — the mothers, sisters and daughters throughout the country — for the paltry sum of €10 million. One can refer to the amount of money that has been squandered by successive Fianna Fáil-led Governments. A total of €45 million was spent on non-medical consultancy costs over a three year period in the Minister’s Department. The Minister stood over this. A sum of €20 million was spent on PPARS, while Professor Drumm’s advisers cost €1.6 million. These are outrageous figures. In this case, however, the Minister is faced with a problem she can address with €10 million but she will not do it.
The Minister has presided over the squandering of all this money. She should hang her head in shame. I spoke to a constituent tonight who is also a close neighbour. She was diagnosed two years ago with cervical cancer. Her life was turned upside down; in her words, her life has been “wrecked” by the scourge of cancer. Her family life has been ruined. She cannot understand what the Minister is trying to do to the Irish people. The Minister has the opportunity to carry out another U-turn. I would applaud her for doing it for the sake of young people and their future. The Minister should swallow her pride and reverse this decision. If she continues on this course, I call on all Government Deputies to support the Fine Gael motion.
Deputy Dinny McGinley: There were many cutbacks in the recent budget and they affected all areas, including agriculture, health, social welfare and education. There were cutbacks across the board. This will cause hardship, suffering, loss of income and many types of discomfort. Of all the cutbacks that have been announced, however, this will cause devastation to families in the years ahead. It is probably the harshest cut of all. I do not like to use the term “merciless” but it is a merciless cut. I have no wish to use the term with regard to the Minister but that is how I see it.
I recall watching the television at home last August when it was announced that this immunisation programme against a particular form of cancer was to be rolled out nationally. I was delighted. Furthermore, being a lay person where medicine is concerned, I was delighted that at last there was a vaccine available against one form of cancer. I considered it a great medical breakthrough. If administered in 2009, as the Minister promised, it would save lives in the future. Each year 70 to 80 young women die of cervical cancer in this country. Consider the devastation such deaths leave in their wake. Many of them are young mothers with young children still at school. Consider the devastation visited on a family when a mother dies. There is devastation when a parent dies but it is particularly hard when a mother dies. It is unbelievable when somebody is left without their mother. Anybody who has experienced it, and there are many, knows how cruel and inhumane it is.
This vaccination programme was announced and everybody was looking forward to it. It was a great breakthrough. Now, however, it has been withdrawn, just to save less than €10 million per annum out of a budget of €16 billion. I have been a Member of this House for many years and I never had the privilege of being a Minister or Minister of State but I can guarantee that if I, a lay person who did some economics many years ago in university, had a half hour with the Health Service Executive, I would find savings of €10 million. It is certainly not beyond the competence of the Minister and the people in the HSE to achieve savings and proceed with the roll-out of this vaccine.
We will not see the results of this today or next year but in ten or 20 years, when few of us will still be Members of this House. Young mothers will make the ultimate sacrifice as a result of the vaccine not being made available to them. I ask the Minister to seriously re-examine this decision. We have addressed farmers’ meetings, meetings on education and other meetings but this is a core issue. For that reason I appeal to you, a Thánaiste——
[566]Deputy Mary Harney: She is in the Deputy’s constituency; the Deputy should know her.
Deputy Dinny McGinley: I have called the Minister, a Thánaiste, on many occasions previously. I appeal to her to re-think this decision.
Deputy Joe McHugh: Eight women died in County Donegal last year from cervical cancer out of a total national figure of 81. I will outline the difficulty I have explaining this decision to parents, particularly mothers. When a person leaves Donegal for Dublin they usually travel by car or bus. There is no train service from Donegal to Dublin. Take the example of a woman suffering from cervical cancer who is travelling by bus to Dublin. The bus will leave Letterkenny, cross the bridge at Lifford and travel to Strabane. When it reaches Strabane the woman can look into the lit up houses if it is the morning or late at night. The question that woman will ask as she travels from Strabane, through Omagh and into Aughnacloy is: “Why will the 12 year old daughters on these roads be entitled to a vaccination procedure, while my 12 year old daughter living in Donegal will not?”
On reaching Emyvale after crossing the Border, she is back in the country that is reactive, not progressive, has no forward vision, does not wish to undertake forward planning and has a stark history of making mistakes and looking at short-term targets. This is a short-term target. It is a disaster. I commend my colleague, Deputy Reilly, for proposing this motion tonight. It is a microcosm of where we are as a country and where we are as a nation. It is a microcosm of all the ills in this country. One need only consider Limerick. The people in Limerick are not different from the people in Donegal. There is a lack of intervention and a lack of building capacity in terms of intervention. Intervention is key, be it in health, the community or in education.
This country is now faced with cutbacks in all areas. School principals are listing the activities that can no longer take place in secondary schools, such as extra-curricular activities, sports and out-of-school activities. The intervention that was taking place is no longer available. Similarly, there is the situation with the health service, where lives could be saved. I am aware that the Minister personally has a genuine interest in saving lives, and she gets credit for that. However, as a Minister she fails to have the courage to take on a bureaucracy and administration that could make savings of €10 million. The people of Ireland will judge the Minister on her courage in taking on the administration.
We must focus on prevention. Following the release of another study on prostate cancer, Rory Hafford this week produced a document which states that 500 to 600 lives could be saved. We need intervention and a U-turn on this issue. I implore the Minister to do it tonight.
Deputy John O’Mahony: I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution to the debate on the reversal of a decision announced last August by the Minister, Deputy Harney. I commend Deputy James Reilly and the Fine Gael Party for proposing the motion. The latest announcement by the Minister is another ill thought out measure in a budget in which figures seem to be more important than people, especially the old, the young and the disabled.
If one considers the decision on economic grounds alone and if one is to be ruthless, uncaring and to think only about money, it is still a bad decision. The estimated €9.7 million cost of the scheme is only a drop in the ocean of the total health budget and will not save money in the long term. Prevention is better than cure. Money spent on prevention will save multiples of the same amount later on in the cost of treatment. If this decision proceeds the Government is being penny wise and pound foolish. Ireland is the only country in western Europe where the number of deaths from cervical cancer continues to rise. To put the decision in perspective, the amount of money involved is less than the cost of building a couple of kilometres of [567]motorway per annum. It just does not make sense. Some 31,000 12 year old girls have lost the secure feeling that cervical cancer is off the agenda for them in years to come.
The Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, stated that this treatment, announced by the Minister in August, was cost effective, that it would in due course prevent more than 50 deaths per annum and it would prevent thousands from developing pre-cancerous cells. HIQA, a State agency, does not agree with the Minister’s decision from last week. While travelling in the car last Friday, I listened to the comments of Deputy McDaid from the Government side of the House. He is vehemently opposed to the decision made by the Minister and to the reversal of the announcement in August. Deputy McDaid suggested some of these children might have a case for suing the State in future years.
The chance of a person dying from cervical cancer can be significantly reduced by this drug. Cervical cancer is the most common cancer among women worldwide, and this is especially the case in Ireland where the figures are double those of other member states of the European Union. Will the Minister reconsider the decision?
Last August, when this decision was announced, the Minister, Deputy Harney, knew that the economy was in free-fall, as did everyone else in the Government and the House. How can the Minister suggest that the money would have been available last August if it is not available now, some two months later? This confirms that many of the decisions in the budget were not thought out. It would be a different matter if the original announcement was one year ago and the Minister could claim the situation had changed, but this is not the case. The announcement was made when the Minister knew that money was scarce. I urge her to reverse this decision.
Deputy John Perry: I thank Deputy Reilly for tabling this very important motion. Whatever about this Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats led Government, the rest of us live in the real world, not in the fantasy land of spin and propaganda. During these harsh November days reality intrudes and shows clearly that much of what passed for effective Government in the past few years was only an illusion. Now the reality of the Government’s incompetence bites back and eats away at the thin veneer of the spin that was passed off as representing substance and competence.
The Minister’s decision to stop the proposed cervical cancer vaccine programme is a perfect example of this incompetence. The programme was announced as a major publicity stunt. The emphasis was on presentation and style and perception became reality. The Government was happy to substitute spin for action and now it is clear that the Government is all spun out. It has rolled back on its commitment to introduce the vaccine. Fine Gael believes it is unacceptable that the Minister, Deputy Harney, should deny a life-saving programme for minimal savings. The decision of the Minister to abandon this programme is short-sighted and unjustifiable, and I call on her immediately to reverse that decision. Consider that €1.7 million is spent on consultants every week. If these costs were not paid for six weeks, the savings would amount to €10 million. The Government could find ten reasons not to implement this proposal, but it should consider the possible savings.
The Health Information and Quality Authority report, published three months ago, advised the Minister for Health and Children that it would cost €9.7 million to administer the plan to vaccinate 12 year old girls. The introduction of the vaccine would be cost saving because it would reduce the burden on hospital services in the long term. The cervical cancer vaccine is the first vaccine ever designed to prevent a cancer and, therefore, the impact of the vaccine programme will be significant. The tragedy of cervical cancer is that it often strikes when a woman is still young. Even with treatment, cervical cancer is an common cause of cancer death in women.
[568]The vaccine is recommended for girls aged between 11 and 12 years. It allows the immune system to be activated and, given the recipient’s age, it also allows for the development of highest antibody levels. The higher the antibody levels, the greater the protection. Thus far the cervical cancer vaccine has proven to be safe. Researchers have observed in clinical trials that the antibody levels in women continue to increase with each of the three doses of the vaccine. Since antibody levels inevitably fall once the vaccine is no longer administered, the ideal vaccination programme is designed to start with high antibody levels to generate the greatest human papilloma virus protection for the longest possible time. In time, scientific research may find that three doses of the vaccine are unnecessary, or it may discover that a booster shot is needed some years later. We do not know the possibilities in such cases at this stage. Given this analysis, will the Minister consider the possibility of starting the programme as scheduled with just one vaccine shot per girl? This approach would at least provide some degree of protection from cervical cancer, even if it not the ideal level of protection. Then when the Minister finds the necessary additional funds, she can introduce the second and third shots of the vaccine.
The Minister’s basic argument is that the funds to facilitate the roll out of the cervical cancer vaccine are not available this year. I believe the funds are in the budget. Will the Minister examine all the costs associated with the proposed transfer of breast cancer services from Sligo General Hospital? A first-class breast cancer service is provided in Sligo General Hospital and there is a sufficient case load to justify retaining the existing service there. The hospital has the results to prove that the service provides one of the best outcomes for patients. It is a serious waste of public money to transfer breast cancer services from Sligo General Hospital. Why does the Minister not halt the transfer of services from Sligo General Hospital and use elsewhere some of the money this would cost?
Last week in the House I discussed the roll out and triple assessment of the programme. I have examined the matter since and there has been no difficulty expressed by Professor Tom Keane on the proposed roll-out of services. Considering there is a budget of €1,600 million in this area, a cost of €10 million for the programme represents a very small amount of money, especially given the preventative possibilities of the vaccine. It was reported yesterday that some €1.7 million is spent every week on consultants. Cancellation of these services for six weeks would save the required amount for the programme.
There was a debacle this weekend in the Defence Forces. Some €19 million was spent on helicopters disposed of for €300,000. Following rebuilding costs of €300,000 they were resold for €18 and €19 million. This is a clear indication of the Government’s incompetence when it comes to doing business. The helicopters were not tendered for on the world market and were purchased for a knock-down price. This proceeded regardless of the associated costs. Naturally, the Minister will not indicate that the Government was at fault in selling the helicopters. If different decisions had been taken there could have been a direct saving of €19 million. An expert stated on the radio yesterday that even allowing for a refit of the helicopters, there was still a profit margin of €10 million, which could have provided the funds for the vaccination service.
This treatment of the young and vulnerable in society is an appalling indictment of the Government, especially given that Ireland was reported to be one of the wealthiest economies in Europe. We were told money was never a difficulty, yet we cannot find the necessary €10 million, which is a sad state of affairs.
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I move amendment No. 1:
I welcome this debate, even though we had another debate last Thursday. In this debate, it is important that we are all fair and reasonable. I have a document in front of me which was published in January 2007. It was the health priorities of the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party if they were in Government, and there is no mention of cancer in the document. I also have a document published by the Fine Gael Party during the election, which emphasis the importance of screening. There is no mention of vaccines. In the run-up to the budget, the Fine Gael spokesperson on finance suggested there should be a 3% cut in the health budget, totalling €700 million in cuts. I asked Deputy Reilly to tell me from where that €700 million would come.
In debates like this, it is important to take perspective into account. Unlike all the other countries mentioned by the Opposition Deputies, for example the UK which has had screening programmes for 20 years, we have only just begun to roll out a national screening programme for cervical cancer in September. By the end of the year, 100,000 women will have been screened. In the month of October alone, 30,000 women registered to be screened. Screening has the capacity to reduce cervical cancer by over 80% in terms of the population, and by 95% in an individual case, if a woman goes for all the screening. Therefore, in a country that does not have a national screening programme, the priority clearly must be to put in place a screening programme that will pick up women that have the pre-cancerous abnormalities, so that they can have treatment. Next year, €35 million is being assigned to the national cervical screening programme.
We live in a country where our cancer outcomes are not what they should be. The exception is in children’s cancer, where we do as well as any country in the world, as children’s cancer is organised and planned in one central location at Crumlin Hospital. However, we do not do well on other cancer treatments. That is why for the last two years we have been seeking to reorganise cancer services for the patients who currently have cancer, so that they can get a better outcome. Deputy Perry referred to Sligo. We do not have an appropriately organised service in Sligo, because we know from the expertise that in order to have a world-class service we need two surgeons with a specialist interest in breast cancer, two radiologists and two [570]pathologists. We do not have that in the hospital in Sligo. We could not have that kind of resource and that level of expertise in hospitals with small volumes of patients.
The other priority is to resource the cancer control programme. Next year, an additional €15 million is being invested in that programme to recruit the skilled expertise that we need for the eight centres, so that the treatments we offer to cancer patients can deliver the best possible outcome that this country can afford. In that context, it was not possible to do everything. I do not need to be convinced about the vaccine. I am a strong proponent of the vaccine, but unfortunately we cannot do it this year. The Government could not engage with any company on the basis that we will not pay it this year, but we might pay next year.
There are over 100 different HPV viruses. Two particular viruses cause 70% of the cancers, and the vaccine can prevent those two particular strains. However, no 12 year old without a vaccine will not get screening with a 95% success rate. Equally, if a 12 year old got the vaccine, she would still have to be involved in the screening programme for the 30% of cancers that are not dealt with by the vaccine. We cannot start a programme this year that we cannot sustain next year and the year after. The decision not to proceed next year was made because we are seriously financially challenged. In the Department of Health and Children, we had to find €700 million worth of savings on planned expenditure for 2009. Since 75% to 80% of the costs are made up of payments to staff, the Deputies can imagine how challenging it is to find the sums of money in the remaining costs. If it were a once-off sum of money, it would not have been a difficult decision. It represents an ongoing sum of money for this year, next year and the year after.
Anybody who claims in this debate that we are sentencing girls to death knows that is not true. Every young woman who does not get this vaccine will be offered a screening programme. Any young woman who would get the vaccine would also have to be involved in a screening programme. The vaccine does not prevent cervical cancer, although it reduces its incidence in 70% of the cases. I accept that.
Deputy Catherine Byrne: What happens if the Government cannot pay for it?
Deputy Mary Harney: The decision that we made was not to introduce the vaccine in 2009. I have heard phrases like “scrapped”, “changed her mind”, “U-turn” and all the rest. When I made the announcement in August, following the advisory group report and the report from HIQA, I made it in good faith. Following the advice given to me, I said that this vaccine was a good thing and should be introduced on the basis of an 80% up-take. There are two companies that make the vaccine and I wanted to make sure we got the most cost-effective version. However, things changed rapidly and there was no anticipation in August that we would have a budget on 14 October. Tax receipts deteriorated rapidly during the month of September. Small and all as the money may seem, the reality is that it is not possible to begin this programme in 2009.
A team of nurses were recruited to increase the take-up of the MMR vaccine. The childhood immunisation programme next year will cost €60 million. When the nurses have finished that programme, they will be available to introduce this vaccine. It was never the intention that it would be done through general practice, in the way pap tests are done. The intention was to do this through an immunisation programme using a team of nurses to carry it out. I wanted to do it in primary schools next year. It would be easier to do it this way, because we already have immunisation programmes under way in primary schools. We would know the children and would be able to obtain permission from their parents. We may now have to do it in secondary school. It is slightly less expensive to do it this way, although not by a huge margin.
[571]There are many people in Ireland who do not realise that screening in a country that does not have it is far more important in the short term than a preventative measure that will take effect in 15 or 20 years. We do not have a good record on cervical cancer when compared with other European countries. The reason is our lack of a national screening programme. The programme is quality assured, and this was the most important criterion used in selecting the people to do the cytology. I was asked to delay that decision so we could reflect on it further. However, it is working incredibly well. About 1,500 smears are being taken every day and 79,000 kits were issued in October alone to doctors, Well Woman clinics and other involved parties.
Deputy James Reilly: That was three weeks after it was initially announced.
Deputy Mary Harney: By the end of the year, 100,000 women will have come forward for a smear test. By any standards, that is a high level of success for a programme introduced in September.
Deputy James Reilly: I find it incredible that will happen between now and the end of December. I do not believe it.
Deputy Mary Harney: We anticipate that next year some 300,000 women will come forward. As the Deputy knows, this programme is geared to 1.1 million women in the State aged between 25 and 60. I emphasise that the screening programme can reduce the incidence of cervical cancer by over 80% and in an individual context by about 95%. I certainly hope that much of the publicity surrounding this issue will encourage people to participate in the screening programme. As regards BreastCheck, even though our screening rate at just over 70% is high when compared internationally, there are still too many people who do not come forward. We all have a role to play in that regard.
The Government must continue to put in place its eight designated centres and provide the resources in 2009 to do so. It is about choices; it is not about having money to do everything. If there are choices, they must be for treatment today and for having specialist centres with expert staff who we know can deliver better outcomes for patients, which is a priority. In addition, a screening programme has the capacity to reduce greatly the incidence of cervical cancer and, following that, a vaccination programme has a role to play. Seven other European countries, if not eight, have not yet introduced the screening programme.
Deputy Paul Kehoe: Thirteen of them have done so.
Deputy Mary Harney: I accept that many countries have, but quite a few have not. I am sure they did not lightly come to the conclusion that they should not do it as quickly as possible.
Deputy Olivia Mitchell: They did not announce it first and then withdraw it.
Deputy Mary Harney: I am sure that, like me, they have different economic challenges and choices must be made. That is the context in which this decision was made for 2009.
Deputy James Reilly: Will we have to wait nine years for the cervical vaccination programme to be rolled out? I think we will. The Minister is dismissing the young, the old and the disabled.
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Mary Wallace): Each year in Ireland there are between 250 and 300 new cases of cervical cancer, and between 70 and 100 women die from it. However, the figures hide the full impact of the disease. This is a cancer which affects younger women more than many other forms of cancer — younger women [572]who have children, commitments and responsibilities. Worldwide, it is the second highest cause of cancer deaths among women.
In the context of the national cancer programme, I welcome the Minister’s decision to allocate an additional €15 million in 2009 for the programme of work under the leadership of Professor Tom Keane of the Heath Service Executive. This year, we have also provided 30 additional posts to the national cancer screening service to facilitate the roll-out of a national cervical screening programme. With an additional sum of €10 million provided in 2009, the full-year cost of the programme will be around €35 million, which is an immediate step towards reducing deaths from cervical cancer by over 80%.
It is clear that the roll-out of a national cervical screening programme is the most effective population-based approach to preventing and controlling cervical cancer. The programme will provide free smear tests through primary care settings to the 1.1 million women living in Ireland aged between 25 and 60. A successful national programme has the potential to cut current mortality rates from cervical cancer by between 80% and 90%.
The national programme provides screening in a primary care setting every three years for women aged 25 to 44, and screening every five years for women aged 45 to 60. It will deliver a national quality-assured cervical screening programme and will be implemented in line with best international practice. All elements of the programme will be quality assured. Call and recall, laboratory services and coloscopy will be managed to deliver a single, integrated national service. It must also be available to women within four weeks of their smear test. All smear test slides will be read twice by two separate cyto-technologists.
The Minister has covered the critical figures but it is important to repeat that up to 100,000 women will be screened by the end of this year. It is planned to screen approximately 300,000 women in 2009. It is also extremely important that women be informed and motivated to attend for screening when invited to do so, even if they have received a HPV vaccine. Vaccination and screening are complementary approaches to controlling cervical cancer. The national cancer screening service, which is rolling out the national cervical screening programme, is aware that it must make every effort to encourage women to attend for screening. The success of the programme relies on a take-up rate of at least 80% in the target group of women aged 25 to 60. Initially, women are self-registering for the cervical check programme, which commenced on 1 September. It is certainly impressive to see the number of women who have come forward for the self-registering process, either by phoning the programme or accessing its website. The programme has prepared a population database of the 1.1 million women who are eligible for screening. It will commence using this and formally calling women from the database when the number of self-registered people reduces. It is also encouraging to see that around 3,800 general practitioners have registered as smear takers for the programme. These GPs are located throughout the country.
The programme plans to cover 300,000 in 2009. The Minister is fully committed to keeping the introduction of the HPV vaccination programme under review, but all these decisions are taken in the context of implementing the overall national cancer programme and, as the Minister stressed earlier, the importance of rolling out the national cancer screening service.
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): While recognising the sincerity of the Opposition motion, I also recognise the Minister’s sincerity in explaining the thinking behind the postponement of the vaccination programme. In this context, I recognise the huge demands on this budget in continuing to support the national cancer strategy. No politicians go out of their way to become unpopular. I have seen the various quotations from newspapers that this Government decision will take lives, but I do not believe [573]that. If we can ensure that people avail of the national screening process, it will go a long way towards assuring many people who may currently have doubts about it. A few minutes ago, Deputy Reilly quoted——
Deputy James Reilly: I am talking about HIQA’s own document.
Deputy John Moloney: I will come to that in a minute.
Deputy James Reilly: Does the Minister of State not believe it?
Deputy John Moloney: Recently an expert panel in the European Commission said that our approach reflects expert advice internationally. For example, they recommended that since no vaccine is 100% effective, national authorities should carry out organised population-wide, quality-assured cervical screening before introducing the HPV vaccine into the population. There is no doubt that experts differ.
Deputy James Reilly: No. They are saying introduce screening first and then this.
Deputy John Moloney: It is fair to make the point that vaccination protects against 70% of the virus that causes cervical cancer, whereas the screening process has success rates in the order of 90%.
Deputy James Reilly: The Minister of State does not believe HIQA.
Deputy John Moloney: I did not say that.
Acting Chairman: We cannot have cross talk.
Deputy John Moloney: I have the greatest respect for HIQA, but I am a little bit confused by the advice I get from experts. I have no difficulty in supporting HIQA when its representatives come before our committee. It is important to recognise certain points, however. First, while there is no doubt that the HPV vaccine is a valuable initiative, it is only one part of helping to prevent deaths from cervical cancer. Second, the vaccination is not and can never be a replacement for routine cervical screening.
Deputy James Reilly: Nobody ever suggested it would be.
Deputy John Moloney: No, but I want to clarify the position for people who have been upset by recent publications regarding the Government’s change of thinking on vaccination. It has been suggested that we are leaving people bereft with no support structure whatsoever, but the national screening process can give major protection. In addition, it is important to note that countries which have organised cervical screening programmes have substantially reduced the numbers of new cases and deaths from cervical cancer. It is not just a case of coming in here to talk about what HIQA or the European Commission’s expert group might say. The proven track record of governments abroad has shown how a national screening process can work, if properly implemented and taken up. The challenge is to do that. I also believe that the approach reflects best international advice. The Minister made it clear that when the decision was announced last August, nobody was aware of the decline in the national taxation returns.
It is worth noting that the Department of Health and Children was expected to cut expenditure by €700 million, yet €400 million was to be found for new services. I refer to the international audit of success rates for the treatment of many cancers, breast cancer in particular. We cannot put one specific cancer area above another. We must centralise the best cancer [574]treatment in the eight centres, but in order to fund those centres every available euro is required. This year €15 million has been allocated in very tight budgetary times to continue the national cancer process. It would be wrong to say that because the Government is not proceeding with the vaccine programme it is not supporting the cancer programme as a whole. I refer to Professor Keane’s recent remarks about the additional cancer strategies and the proposals he intends to implement. It is also important to stress that the requirement for a population base for a cervical cancer screening programme is not replaced by the introduction of a vaccine programme. In other words, even if we had the wherewithal to go with the vaccination programme, the reality is that the first major check or safeguard is the screening programme.
Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I wish to clarify the speaking time as being 20 minutes tonight and ten minutes tomorrow night.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Brian O’Shea): There is a half an hour left in the debate.
Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I am not quite sure how I am going to deal with that. I intend to share time tonight with Deputy Ó Caoláin and tomorrow night with Deputies Upton and Wall, with the permission of the House.
I compliment Deputy Reilly and the Fine Gael Party on tabling this motion. As the Minister said, we debated this issue last Thursday but it is very important to have an opportunity to return to it. Despite the three speeches I have just heard, I hope we can still persuade the Government to introduce this vaccine as intended in September of next year for 12 year old girls.
We must rescue this programme from the cutbacks. The cost is perhaps less than €10 million even though last week the figure of €14 million was mentioned. It is accepted now that it can be done for €10 million as a school-based programme, particularly with competitive tendering from the two companies concerned which can provide the vaccine. I will speak later about how we might save the money. I again ask the Minister to keep an open mind on the possibility of finding this money from somewhere within her budget for next year. I ask her not to let this programme go.
I believed the Minister was correct when she stated last August that she intended to introduce this programme. She said last August, “I accept the expert advice that the introduction of a universal high-uptake vaccination programme for young girls, in conjunction with population-based cervical screening, could significantly reduce overall cervical cancer rates”. This is very clear and we should not quibble about whether it is more or less effective than screening. The fact is that it is effective, as the Minister agreed last August. I acknowledge that she stated in her contribution tonight that she did not want people to think she had somehow or other changed her mind. I accept that she has not changed her mind. However, she has decided that the money is not there to introduce the scheme, despite the fact that within a health budget of approximately €16 billion this will amount to €10 million or less. I urge the Minister to find that money.
As other speakers have said, a wide range of people, experts and organisations who care about this issue have strongly condemned the decision to put the programme on hold, including the Irish Cancer Society, the Marie Keating Foundation, the All-Ireland Cancer Foundation, the European Cervical Cancer Association, the Irish Family Planning Association, the Well Woman Centre and many others. Probably more important, many ordinary people had expected that their 12 year old daughters would be offered this vaccine next year and regarded this as an important preventative measure. Of all the cancers, cervical cancer can be almost [575]eradicated within our lifetimes if there is a combination of the screening and vaccination programmes. This is not the case with other cancers which, even with our best efforts, will still kill a percentage of our population. However, in the case of cervical cancer, we have opportunities which we should avail of. The publicity has created an awareness of the vaccine and many parents will purchase this vaccine for their daughters. However, it is regrettable that many families will be unable to afford to pay to protect their daughters. There is something obscene, in my opinion, about having to make such a choice and in the inequality of choice.
I urge the Minister to rethink her decision. It should not be presented as a competition between screening and vaccination or a competition between treatment and vaccination. We should not ration our health resources in that way. I fully support the screening programme which is very good and I am pleased it is being rolled out this year. However, the vaccine should also be provided.
As the Minister of State, Deputy Wallace, said, this is largely an illness affecting women in the younger age groups. Many cancers do not strike until later in life but half of all those who develop cervical cancer do so before the age of 50. We are talking about women whose lives will be considerably shortened if they develop this illness. All those factors must be considered and I ask the Minister to change her mind.
The cost of the programme was discussed last week and whether it could be done for less than €14 million. I believe it can be done for considerably less than that amount. The companies concerned will be willing to offer a lower price. I note there is competition between Aldi and Lidl and Dunnes and Tesco and prices come down as a result of competition. There is a competitive element to the tendering which I believe will result in a good price.
A top-up rubella vaccine is given in schools to girls of that age. Would it be possible to save on administrative costs by giving this vaccine at the same time as the rubella top-up? I do not know if this is possible but it is a suggestion worth investigating. This might also encourage an uptake of the vaccine. The Minister would hope for an 80% uptake.
There is an obligation on us to address the issue of finding the money and various suggestions have been made. The HSE farms out work to various private companies. In the case of the health repayment scheme which cost €15 million, the HSE paid a private company to write to all the people in the north east whose X-rays were reviewed, a total of more than 5,000 people. We all know there are many people working in the HSE who are unsure of what work they should be doing, including many people at the higher management levels. There are many grades pushing paper around. We were asked to be patriotic with regard to the budget. Will the Minister ask the HSE to find people within its organisation who can do this work and save money? We did not find out until afterwards that the €15 million was spent on the health repayments scheme. I do not know what else they are planning to farm out to various companies. There are many demoralised people among the Department’s civil servants and within the HSE who do not know what they are supposed to be doing. I ask the Minister to go back to the HSE to find whether it can save money in this area or otherwise find this money. The Minister should get to work with the HSE, her Department, the schools and the providers of the vaccine and seek to find a way in which she can introduce this programme at the time she had intended to do so. We should not give up on it.
Deputy Harney is the Minister for Health and Children, not the Minister for sickness. Prevention of illness is one of the most important jobs a Minister for Health and Children can do and this is a preventative measure. I urge the Minister not to close her mind to introducing it at the time she intended to do so. Not much has changed since August and I am sure what is a relatively small amount of money within the overall budget can be found.
[576]The public was struck by the wrongness of this decision. With all of the various issues we were faced with in the budget, such as the medical card cuts for the over 70s, the education cutbacks and the variety of cutbacks outlined again today in the Social Welfare Bill, people were struck that the Minister could go back on a measure she announced in August that would prevent a deadly illness in the future. It is a preventative health measure that would cost relatively little within the overall budget. How could it become a victim of the cuts? People are genuinely shocked by this.
The Minister is a reasonable person, although I do not agree with her on many issues. It is possible to find this money. I urge that in this debate we should focus our minds on trying to find a way out of this and try to rescue the programme for next year.
Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Once again the Dáil has to call to account Deputy Harney in her capacity as Minister for Health and Children for what I can only describe as yet another disgraceful decision that will have a most negative impact on the health of the people. Last weekend the Minister’s party abolished itself but it is a great pity that the anti-people policies of her party, the Progressive Democrats, so long embraced fully by Fianna Fáil, were not abolished as well. Those policies unfortunately live on in Fianna Fáil and in this Government.
The decision to cancel the HPV vaccination programme arose from an ethos and a policy which puts public health in second place to petty book-keeping and a privatisation agenda. The Health Information and Quality Authority has estimated the total cost of introducing the HPV vaccine at €9.7 million. Allegedly to save this sum, a public health programme which would have saved women’s lives is being axed by the Minister, Deputy Harney, yet the budget left intact the tax breaks for the developers of private hospitals at far greater cost. In the year 2006 alone, the latest year for which figures are available, the Government gave tax breaks worth €10.6 million to the developers of private for-profit hospitals. In a budget that slashed public services, those tax breaks were left untouched, although they could have paid for this vaccination programme several times over. Also untouched in the budget was the Minister’s and the Government’s totally discredited private hospital co-location scheme.
I would remind the Green Party Members, if they were present, of what their current leader, then their health spokesperson, the Minister, Deputy John Gormley, said of the PDs in this Chamber in February 2007:
Deputy Gormley also said: “Ireland has one of the highest cancer rates in the world and with this Government refusing to deal with the problem, the statistics are likely to continue to grow”. Deputy Gormley and his colleagues will no doubt troop in to vote down this motion side by side with their Fianna Fáil and ex-PD colleagues tomorrow. I would advise the Green Party it might in these circumstances change its logo from a sunflower to a banana. When it went into Government with Fianna Fáil, it was undoubtedly green. It then turned yellow. Sadly, we are witnessing day after day that, as with bananas, the inevitable happens and they become rotten.
The Minister announced the HPV programme only three months ago and now it has been axed. The manner in which the cancellation was announced was typical of the sly management of bad news by this Government in that it was released on the day of the US presidential election. The Minister has made what I can only describe as pathetic efforts to defend this decision — I listened to her contribution earlier on the monitor. She has repeatedly tried to [577]make people believe it was somehow a choice between continuing the rollout of the cervical cancer screening programme or introducing the HPV vaccination programme. This is completely wrong and deceptive on two counts.
First, screening is not a substitute for vaccination. The vaccination programme is to prevent the forms of cervical cancer concerned, whereas the screening programme is to detect cancer when it occurs. It cannot be a case of either-or. To save women’s lives, both programmes should be in place.
Second, the Minister’s argument is false on the grounds of cost. I have already identified one area where much greater savings could be made while allowing this programme to proceed. It has also been pointed out that the public procurement of the vaccine on the scale needed would entail significant price reductions, in which the Minister claims to be very interested. One estimate puts the cost as low as €7 million. In terms of the delivery of the vaccine, there is no reason it cannot be administered in conjunction with other vaccination programmes. This is to say nothing of the savings to the health service that will be made by preventing this cancer. Beyond the figures and the book-keeping, let us not forget that what we are talking about here are the lives and health of women in this country.
When the Minister first announced the programme back in August, it was widely welcomed. HIQA stated it was a welcome decision and that “a vaccine programme, together with a cervical cancer screening programme, will have a significant impact on reducing the incidence of cervical cancer for women in Ireland”. In June, HIQA published the Health Technology Assessment of the role of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccines in Reducing the Risk of Cervical Cancer in Ireland. HIQA pointed out that infection with HPV is the main cause of cervical cancer, the eighth most frequently diagnosed cancer in women in Ireland. In 2004 alone, 200 women were diagnosed with cervical cancer, while over 90 women died of the disease. HIQA continued, and I emphasise: “Vaccination against HPV therefore represents a new opportunity to reduce the incidence of, and mortality from, this form of cancer”.
Following a request from the National Cancer Screening Service Board, HIQA agreed in July 2007 to carry out a health technology assessment on the role of vaccination against HPV in reducing the risk of cervical cancer in Ireland. The authority asked the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics to undertake the health technology assessment. The purpose of this assessment was to establish the cost-effectiveness of a combined national HPV vaccination and cervical cancer screening programme compared to a cervical cancer screening programme alone. The results of this cost-effectiveness analysis showed that universal HPV vaccination of 12 year old females would be cost-effective. The report also recommended a once-off vaccination programme for 13 to 15 year old females. At older ages, the vaccine becomes less effective due to an increased likelihood of females being exposed to the virus before vaccination.
The final report, the findings of which were approved by the expert advisory group which was convened by the board of HIQA, was submitted to the Minister for Health and Children, the National Cancer Screening Service Board and the National Immunisation Advisory Committee. On that basis, the Minister for Health and Children announced in August her decision to proceed with the vaccination programme. Now all that careful assessment and analysis and all the expert advice has been turned on its head by her. The chief executive of the Irish Cancer Society, John McCormack, has said the Minister’s decision to cancel the vaccination programme is “very disappointing” and added that “1 euro’s prevention is as good as 2 euro of cure”. The Dublin Well Woman Centre has said the Minister’s decision is both short-sighted, dangerous and an illogical move that will cost even more in the long term.
[578]Savings could and should have been made on tax breaks for the private health industry, not on programmes that will enhance the health of women and prevent much greater cost in the future, both in the well-being of individuals and the cost to the health service of cancer treatment.
When the Minister introduced the Bill establishing HIQA, she told the House:
The Minister’s decision on the human papillomavirus vaccine shows that far from learning from the past, she and her Government colleagues are repeating the mistakes of the past. I appeal to them to reverse this decision. If the Government will not do so, then let those on the benches opposite, some of whom must share the Opposition’s incredulity at this decision, vote against the Government amendment tomorrow night. Sinn Féin fully supports the Fine Gael motion.
Deputy Mary Upton: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this debate and to support the Fine Gael motion. When the word “cancer” is uttered, it strikes fear into the heart of anyone who is conscious of the horrific consequences it can have on the individual affected and his or her wider family. A commitment was made in which the word “cancer” could have been included in a positive sentence with the words “vaccination” and “prevention”. It is a great disappointment to all Members that there has been an about-turn on this commitment. Instead, we must go back to worrying about the consequences in this lost opportunity for cervical cancer prevention.
When the vaccination programme was first mooted, there was a concern it could be controversial, particularly regarding the vaccination of young girls of 11 and 12 years of age. I recall debating this with someone who told me there may be concerns but realistically the positives would be more substantial. Interestingly, the telephone calls that I and some of my colleagues have received relate to the disappointment of those young girls who were told they would be the first to avail of this positive opportunity. The programme’s cancellation has become a great disappointment to people.
It is also a great pity that it has become an economic debate. This should not be about economics; it should be about good health and preventive medicine. Last year, a friend spoke to me about the magic €1 million and €10 million, these figures which can be pulled from everywhere and anywhere. I accept, in reality, that cannot be done in all cases. However, I propose we establish a set of priorities. While it is very well for me to say this will cost €10 million, so let us find it, it must be seen in the context of a much wider budget, and if necessary, the health budget. I accept there will be consequences but it has been outlined by my colleagues how important it is to set priorities in the overall budget, particularly the health budget. It is against this background that the Minister should look carefully at her decision not to go ahead with the cervical cancer vaccination programme.
The Government’s policy has been very remiss in not taking on board the value of preventive medicine. We are always chasing the story. This occurs with other illnesses such as, for example, diabetes. Diabetes is a common illness which is well-documented and the costs around its treatment and so forth have been worked out. If we were to put in place a preventive programme that worked on re-training and re-modelling, its impact could be substantial. We should be looking much more at prevention rather than constantly curing an illness. As a previous speaker stated, it seems we are focused on a Minister for illness and not a Minister for health. If people could only take account of the fact that certain illnesses can be prevented, we would [579]have a much more positive approach to the whole health programme. As a consequence there would be much greater savings to the health budget in the long term.
This has become an economic debate rather than a health debate. While I spoke about the consequences and difficulties in finding the moneys to fund the cervical cancer vaccination programme, as they are relatively small they should be found. The effect of cancelling the programme has been damaging to people’s attitudes to the health services and health care. The programme was promised and was coming on stream. It was accepted it could be very valuable with long-term savings. In economic terms, we should measure the economic value as well as the health care value.
The HIQA report, Health Technology Assessment on the Role of Vaccination against Human Papillomavirus (HPV) in Reducing the Risk of Cervical Cancer in Ireland, recommended:
The 11 and 12 year old age group will not just be affected but also the 13 to 15 year old age group.
Regarding the question of priorities, it seems a great pity that those who can afford health care can buy it while those who cannot are being neglected and deprived.
Acting Chairman: The Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights has completed its consideration of the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008 and has made amendments thereto.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
Deputy Róisín Shortall: This budget’s cuts target children and I have already highlighted the cuts in child benefit. I will move on to another area in which the budget and this legislation have been very disappointing. I refer to children who could be described as the poorest of the poor — the 96,000 children under the age of 14 who are living in consistent poverty. I am thinking particularly of those children whose parent or parents are exclusively dependent on social welfare. There has been a debate about whether it is best to use child benefit to assist those children and lift them out of poverty or to increase the qualified child allowance. Over the years it has been accepted that the best approach was to employ child benefit. There is no doubt that in the past there have been significant increases in child benefit. However, in these more straitened times, given the existence of this cohort of children who are lagging way behind, there is an argument for targeting these children by providing an additional payment to them. That principle was accepted in the context of the debate that was going on a number of years ago about the provision of supports for lone parents. At that time the thrust of such proposals was very much welcomed, although the detail needed to be hammered out, and concern was expressed by some groups working in that area. However, the principle espoused in these proposals — that there should be a supplementary payment to children in poor families irrespective of whether their parents were married, whether there was one parent or two in the family home, and whether their parents were working — was precisely what was needed. It was a measure which would support children in poverty irrespective of their other family circumstances. That is still very much needed. In the absence of progress in this area, however, there is an unanswerable case for targeting those children who remain in consistent poverty with supports. For that reason, the miserly €2 per week increase in income support for those children is very disappointing.
The restriction of the early childhood supplement has been portrayed as a change that will be introduced to end the payment of the supplement at five and a half years of age. There is no basis for that decision. I do not know why it is happening and I think it is mean. However, it goes further than that. Hidden in that proposal is something that has not been spelt out by the Minister — the change in the method of payment of the supplement from a quarterly to a monthly payment. No reference at all is made to the fact that this change encompasses a particularly sneaky cut. It is not just a half-year’s payment that will be lost; it is more than that. Previously, the early childhood supplement was paid up to the time the child was 75 months. Now it will be paid only until the age of 66 months. This will result in a loss of €800 to parents of children aged five and a half. This is a retrograde step and I do not know why it has been introduced. It is a particularly sneaky cut, targeted at families with small children, many of whom are on low incomes. It should not be happening. There are many other targets that could have been hit in order to make savings.
There is serious concern about the provisions regarding claw-back in the rent supplement scheme. As a result of the €5 claw-back on rent, people in private rented accommodation on rent supplement and who are in receipt of a social welfare payment are getting an increase of only €1.50 rather than €6.50 per week. I spoke to the Minister about this earlier during Question Time. She gave a long explanation after which she stated that this was entirely reasonable. It is incredible that the Minister for Social and Family Affairs would say it is entirely reasonable [581]for a person on social welfare to get an increase of €1.50, which is what it amounts to. In real terms, this amounts to a substantial cut in these people’s incomes. Rather than being entirely reasonable, it shows that the Minister is entirely out of touch. If she thinks people can survive on that level of income, she is on a different planet.
There are a number of omissions from the Bill which are very disappointing. There is no improvement in the back to education initiative and nothing on the back to work enterprise initiative. There is no mention of pension reform, in spite of promises given during the Green Paper process of firm proposals with regard to the burning issue of pensions. There is nothing for lone parents, in spite of the fact that the previous two Ministers promised changes in this regard. There is a major need for reform in this area to bring it up to date and deal with the issue of cohabitation. There is also no reform to the rent supplement scheme, despite the increase in the numbers availing of and relying on the scheme. There is a need to introduce a differential rent, as in the rental accommodation scheme — that is the benefit of RAS. This could be done in respect of people who are in receipt of rent supplement. It is extremely disappointing that in spite of promises over many years there is still no carers’ strategy in place. It had been promised for the end of 2007 but there is no sign of it yet. This is yet another in a long list of omissions from this legislation. Overall, it is extremely disappointing and that is the reason the Labour Party will be opposing it.
Deputy Timmy Dooley: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. It is worth considering the size of the Bill and the cost to the State of €19.5 billion projected for 2009. As I understand it, that money supports around 1.7 million men, women and children in the State. Clearly it is not possible at this time for the Government to put in place the increases that would ordinarily be expected based on the growth rate of the economy over the past number of years. Notwithstanding that, the State has put an extra €2.6 billion into the budget this year to take account of the expected increase in unemployment. As most people in the House will know, the average number on the live register in 2008 was 220,000, while the projected number for next year is 290,000. The social welfare budget must take account of this and must put in place within the Vote the necessary funds to deal with the fallout. This has taken up much of the slack that might in the past have been used to improve some of the other elements. We must recognise that the rate of inflation has reduced considerably, and the increases in the rates of payment are commensurate with this. Therefore, while not as high as people would like, they are appropriate to deal with the increased costs faced by those 1.7 million people over the coming year.
Deputy Shortall spoke about the early childhood supplement and the fact that the scheme was being limited at five and a half years of age as opposed to six. I remember taking a keen interest in this measure when it was first introduced. Much of the talk was about a pre-school requirement for children and the call on the State at the time was to provide for children in advance of their starting school. To the best of my knowledge, most children are in school before they reach the age of five and a half; if not, they are exceptions to the rule. Many children go to school at four. This support was put in place to assist parents in providing for the relatively high cost associated with pre-school requirements for children. Therefore the five and a half years cut-off is appropriate. One must also take into account that the State has very heavily invested in the provision of child care places for children with particular needs. The approach to the provision of places is skewed towards children from lower incomes. Deputy Shortall talked about the need for child care coming from low income families. People having children do not necessarily come from the low income bracket. That is why the State’s investment in the child care programme focuses on providing services for children from less well off backgrounds where the parents are primarily on social welfare. The needs are more than well [582]addressed and it is right and appropriate that the new level be put in place. It saves money that can be used to better facilitate those in greatest need.
Deputy Shortall identified the monthly payment as a cost saving, but that money is not being squirrelled away for some other purpose. The requirement in the Department of Social and Family Affairs Vote for next year increases by €2.6 billion. While it is never easy for a Minister to have to recognise or develop changes in this way, it was the right thing to do. Money is not being taken from anybody; the scheme will end a little earlier than in the past.
The Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill is a clear statement by the Government to protect the most needy and vulnerable in society, whether pensioners or the unemployed. We have targeted that well in this approach, notwithstanding the very significant change in the economy. The State is borrowing to meet current expenditure. We are raising less tax than we would have in the past and the difference is approximately €10 million per day. That is unsustainable in the long term. Some of the “nice to have” measures that were there in the past, in good times, were part of the Government’s commitment when it had the available resources to put them into the identified areas. When circumstances change there is a requirement to fund the areas that are most in need and that is happening in the changes in this Bill.
It is important we recognise we face many challenges. The most significant challenge is to try to control the level of public spending without taking too much spending power from the economy, which will lead to a further recession. The Government’s central approach is to try to limit spending while retaining the capacity for people to work towards reversing the downward trend and moving towards growth in the economy. We all recognise this is the only way to allow for the economy to provide for itself rather than depending on borrowing.
This phenomenon is not relevant only to Ireland. To everybody in this House who looks to other countries or who spends any time reading the national and international press, the problems we encounter are being encountered across the developed world. Some other jurisdictions, particularly the Asian markets, have seen very significant changes and downward growth patterns despite the fact they did not have the same level of development in their economy. A small, open economy such as ours will have suffered to a greater extent than many larger countries. It is only a matter of time before they encounter the same levels of difficulty we have. Growth rates happened for us more quickly than others.
The challenges we face require very decisive action. This Government has the necessary experience to manage the economy in these difficult times. It is about facing up to the difficult decisions and accepting that what happened in the past has been to the benefit of this country. However, we must arrest the decline in our tax intakes and look at spending in a much more careful way. The level of scrutiny put in place by the Departments of Social and Family Affairs and Finance is right. The increases in social welfare payments are generally in line with inflation. They are not as large as anybody would like to put in place, but it is important to manage the available finances as well as possible. The increase of €7 per week for all State pensioners, whether contributory or non-contributory, along with carers aged 66 and over from January 2009 is helpful. The jobseeker’s allowance will increase by €6.50 per week, notwithstanding what Deputy Shortall said, bringing that to €204.30 per week.
It is difficult for people who have to survive on that kind of payment. While the small increase will not change their lives in any real way I am less concerned about those who have been managing on it to date. The biggest difficulty will be encountered by those who over the past number of weeks and in the coming months will find themselves out of employment. In some cases redundancy payments will help them over the hump, however many people will not have that level of security. They will find themselves going from having a relatively decent [583]income to being, perhaps for the first time in their lives, dependent on social welfare. It is projected that approximately 70,000 extra people will go on the live register. The shock for them will be very significant and will pose major difficulties for the families, particularly those who have young children, mortgages and financial commitments.
I appeal to the banking fraternity to show a level of compassion and, perhaps, support to families which find themselves in those circumstances. The Government has taken a very proactive approach to dealing with the banking crisis by putting in place the necessary security to allow banks to trade themselves out of the difficulties which they got themselves into. Some banks suggest they find themselves in this position as a result of an international problem and that is partly correct. The lack of regulation that emanated from the United States and, perhaps, was followed in other countries allowed banks to neglect the necessary scrutiny of lending they would have carried out in the past. Given the nature of competition, this lack of regulation may have forced banks to follow this pattern. That has clearly caused problems. I appeal to the banks to look kindly on people who need their support.
While it is not clear what is happening in the banking sector, from talking to people on the ground, whether individuals or small businesses, the banks seem to be trying to find their own route out of the capitalisation issue. They seem to be moving on people or small businesses who have term loans and which they believe have the capacity to generate funds to pay off those loans in a shorter term than initially agreed. That is entirely wrong. In the near future the banks will need to be recapitalised. It is not clear how that will be done. As a last resort banks should expect the State to provide that capitalisation but I encourage the Government to give it consideration in the event that it becomes absolutely necessary. The banks’ lack of capital reserves, particularly in tier one capital, to provide funds not just to small businesses but to individuals who find themselves out of work, will have a detrimental impact on our economy. The basic social welfare rate would not allow somebody who is employed, has a young family with all the associated financial commitments and is paying for his or her own home, to live in any kind of normal way. A requirement for debt will be associated with that.
We need to take an approach to the recapitalisation of the banks that prevents more people from coming onto the live register. There is a considerable necessity for the Dáil, as an elected body, to deal with the capitalisation of the banks. It is difficult to communicate that with the public. There is a perception among the public that the bank guarantee scheme that was put in place by the Government involved the bailing out of the banks. It is clear that was not the case. No State money has been put into the banks. The average person on the street believes that the State has bailed out the banks and the big builders and, in return, cut social welfare, taken medical cards from pensioners and done a whole lot of nasty things to school children. Much of that perception has been promoted by certain organs of the media. All of it sounds good, but none of it is true. There has been no bail-out of the banks. This Parliament needs to grapple with that perception.
We have to be in a position to communicate with the public the absolute need for the banks to be recapitalised in a way that allows for the orderly continuance of the basic commerce of society. People who experience particular life events — the loss of a job, or some requirement relating to the health of a family member — need to be able to access short-term loans from the banks. If we are to ensure we do not end up with more people on the live register, we need to enable banks to provide funds to small businesses, thereby allowing such businesses to continue as they have in the past.
The Bill provides for an increase of €2, to €20 a week, in the fuel allowance payment. While the increase is relatively small, it is important. The number of weeks for which the fuel allowance scheme will run each year will increase to 32 from April 2009, which is welcome. I hope [584]the levelling off in energy prices we have seen over recent weeks will continue, as it would take some of the pressure from households this winter. The 300,000 householders who benefit from the fuel allowance scheme avail of a valuable payment. While we all agree that it is not enough, it is about as much as can be done in the current environment.
An increase of up to €6 a week, per child, will be provided for under the family income supplement scheme. The payment in question is particularly useful for those who find themselves having to take up lower-paid jobs as a result of the way the economy has gone. The qualified child payment will increase from €24 to €26. While it is not as large an increase as we would like to see, it is basically in line with the expected consumer price index for the coming year.
It is important that there will be an increase in the number of people who are eligible to claim the back to school allowance. The sad reality of the debate at present is that the teacher unions are motivating parents to be concerned about class sizes. It has to be recognised that it is an important issue. Parents are concerned about it. Those who will lose their jobs in the coming months will be concerned about how they will be able to dress their children as they go back to school next August and September. They will have to meet the basic needs of their children, such as clothes and books. That has not been an issue for many such people before now.
It is welcome that more people will be eligible for the back to school allowance. The time of the year when children return to school is a difficult one for some parents, particularly those who have not had to encounter this issue in the past. It is important that the Minister has announced that a double payment will be made to social welfare recipients this Christmas. People who are out of work, perhaps for the first time in their entire careers, will be under pressure this Christmas. The kind of advertising that is aimed at young people, in particular, puts a particular strain on families as they try to keep pace with their social peers. Anything that can be done in this regard is welcome and needs to be addressed. For example, credit unions and banks may be able to assist parents in getting through the Christmas period.
I welcome the decision to reduce the qualifying period for jobseeker’s benefit from 15 months to 12 months for those with 260 contributions. As I understand it, the Government is aware of the need to protect and enhance the income levels of the less well-off in society. We continue to face serious social challenges. We need to work harder to improve the lot of the many people who continue to depend on social assistance.
It is clear that ordinary families are facing many pressures, some of which I have alluded to. Such challenges are much greater than they were in the past because we have experienced a record level of employment in this country. Many jobs were created in recent years as a result of the kind of approach that was taken in 1987. That approach, which was informed by the requirement for fiscal rectitude, was supported by almost all parties in this House. Most people agreed that it was important to get the finances of this country right. The same approach is part of the framework within which the recent budget and the Bill before the House have been put together. The underlying theme is the need to ensure we balance the books at the earliest possible point and work to try to rebuild the economy in line with developments at international level.
Deputy Catherine Byrne: I listened carefully to the statement made by the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, on the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008. I was struck by how enthusiastic she was as she explained how generously she was treating the less-well off in our community. I started to wonder whether the Bill I had read was the same document as the one to which she was referring.
[585]On 14 October last, the 2009 budget hit us like a steam train. We knew the economy was in difficulty but we hoped the Government would try to make the best of a bad situation by protecting the most vulnerable in our society, at the very least. Sadly this did not happen. Instead, we were hit with one set of cutbacks after another. The Minister for Finance tried to convince us that his budget would protect and support those most in need. The sad reality is the only group the Government is committed to helping and supporting is the banking sector. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan, referred to his budget as a call to patriotic action. In other words, we are being asked to bail out a Government that did not plan for an economic downturn but instead spent every cent trying to keep the electorate happy in the run-up to last year’s general election.
In the aftermath of budget 2009, there is a feeling of anger and betrayal on our streets. Young and old people have felt the brunt of Government cutbacks in areas like health, education and social welfare. They will not easily forget what the Government has put them through. The medical card disaster caused huge upset and worry for elderly people across the country. I will never forget the protests outside Leinster House against the changes in medical card eligibility for people over the age of 70. That week, I met hundreds of people in my constituency of Dublin South Central who were visibly upset and furious with the Government. I even received a telephone call from a farmer who explained to me that he and his wife, who are both 80 years of age, have worked hard on the land all their lives to support their family. They were upset that having supported their country through tough times, a valued entitlement was being taken away from them. After much back-tracking by the Government as it tried to resolve the crisis, the situation improved somewhat, but the entire saga has left a bitter taste with people.
This Government has shown no loyalty to people with disabilities. It initially tried to remove the entitlement to disability benefit of people between the ages of 16 and 18 but later did a U-turn, following a substantial public outcry. Such behaviour is a poor reflection on the Government’s commitment to disability issues. If it was not bad enough to target the elderly and people with disability, our young people are also under attack through an increase in the pupil-teacher ratio, the loss of 1,000 teachers, schools building projects coming to a standstill, the axing of funding for Traveller children, the scrapping of the free book scheme for 90% of schools and the abandoning of new subjects after schools had been given the go-ahead to provide them. For example, last year Drimnagh Castle secondary school was asked to support a new technology curriculum in 2010 for fifth and sixth year students. The school was informed it would receive a grant of €40,000 annually to provide the subject. I spoke to the principal recently who said he had not seen sight or sound of the money but he is still expected to roll out the technology curriculum, which the children will sit as a first time examination subject in 2010.
While the early school leaving rate is running at 29%, in the south west inner city in my constituency, we cannot abandon our young people who have been left hanging on to the edge for too long. How can the Government seriously stand by such cuts when they will clearly have a devastating effect on the education of our children? The Government parties should have more respect and loyalty to our young people who are the future of this country, but they are being left to dig the Government parties out of the mess into which they got everyone.
The Bill is nothing to be proud of, because it contains no concrete proposals to reduce reliance on social welfare and it offers no prospect for people to get back into the workforce. Small increases in payments are provided for but they do not go far enough at a time when unemployment is increasing on a daily basis and more and more families are forced to rely heavily on social welfare through no fault of their own. A total of 250,000 people are on the dole, with predictions that this figure will soon increase to more than 300,000. The Government’s response is to increase jobseeker’s benefit by a measly €6.50 per week and to make it [586]more difficult to qualify for the payment. From January, it will be compulsory to have 13 paid contributions to qualify for this benefit. This will make it more difficult for young people, in particular, who had only started out in the workforce and recently lost their jobs. This will also increase pressure on families and parents, who have to support them as best they can, even into their 20s, if they lose their jobs.
The Minister has doubled the number of PRSI contributions paid since starting work from 52 to 104 for new claimants, which also makes it more difficult to access jobseeker’s payments. The reduction in the time a person can be in receipt of jobseeker’s benefit means many unemployed persons stand to lose approximately €2,600. In addition, waiting times for processing new claims are lengthy. People do not know where they stand and they are being forced onto the poverty line as they have no income. The Minister said she does not want people to develop a dependency on social welfare payments, but this it not the way forward. At a time like this, we must stand and support the social welfare recipients, particularly those who are unemployed, to give them the opportunity they need.
The Government prides itself on pumping money into FÁS to put people on training courses but they want jobs. Last week, I met a man who worked for 47 years as a highly skilled bricklayer. He was made redundant and he was recently contacted by FÁS who forwarded him to the local partnership to be retrained. He felt this was a demoralising and humiliating experience. After 47 years working in a highly skilled trade, he was asked to sit in front of a computer to be retrained but there are no jobs for him and many others like him. It is humiliating to ask a man who worked hard to rear his family to go back into training. If the Government is committed to retraining, why does it insist on making it so difficult to access the back to education allowance? I strongly disagree with the requirement for people to be on social welfare for 12 months before they can claim this allowance. They should be encouraged back into education and retraining and not forced to be dependent on social welfare. Reform is urgently needed and the Government needs to carefully rethink this process and make employment the goal.
This year’s budget did nothing for our children and, instead, it reduced child benefit. A parent of an 18 year old stands to lose almost €1,000 in 2009 and almost €2,000 in 2010 due to the changes to child benefit. The reduction in the age limit for the early childhood supplement from six to five and a half years is another blow to families who have grown used to this payment. Child care costs have spiralled in recent years and parents are finding it more difficult to make ends meet. That is why it is important to support families and young children.
Child poverty is a reality in our society whether we want to believe it. Currently, one in nine children lives in consistent poverty in Ireland. Poverty for children means that they are excluded from activities that are considered normal in society. Child poverty has a long-term effect. It makes a difference to children’s health, their educational achievement, how long they will live, how well they develop physically and mentally, the jobs they acquire as well as their overall life opportunities. If, as legislators, we do not fight to give our children every opportunity for their future, then we have failed them and this cannot be allowed to happen.
Fuel poverty is a threat to this country. An increase of €2 per week in the fuel allowance is not enough. We have experienced significant hikes in energy costs in recent months and low income households are struggling to pay fuel bills that are increasing every month. There was a time €2 would buy four bales of sticks but that is long past. On a recent visit to my local retail hardware store, a small bag of sticks cost €3.49. This is a sign of the times and the Bill does nothing to address the serious threat of fuel poverty. When I was growing up in Inchicore, I lived close to the Fleetwood factory and every week the gates were opened on Wednesdays and Fridays in order to give broken brush handles to people. People used to come from all [587]over, including Ballyfermot, Inchicore, Crumlin and Drimnagh, with their carts to collect the broken handles. Surely, we are not returning to those days. It is a long time since I saw people queuing to collect sticks. A fuel strategy is needed, which will deal with increasing costs and ensure the less well off do not suffer unnecessarily.
The budget was a disaster and the Bill falls short of what is needed to address the serious and urgent problems facing the vulnerable in our society. The Government rushed into this year’s budget without realistic or practical plans for the year ahead.
The Minister was very much at home in the Department of Education and Science, a Ministry close to her heart. However, as Minister for Social and Family Affairs, she has left her comfort zone. The legislation shows her lack of understanding of what it is like to be unemployed or a lone parent and, especially, of what it is like to be poor and to lack what is needed to get through the day.
Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. I do not wish to rise to the previous speaker but, as someone who mentions his constituency now and again, I am interested to hear a colleague name almost every street in his or her constituency and that makes me feel comfortable. In deference to the previous speaker, the Minister is responding to what people are saying, which is important. I repeated the other day that of all the statements US President-elect Obama made last week, one that really struck me was when he stated that he will listen to people, especially when he disagrees with them. It is important that we all follow that, and I suspect the Minister will too.
I wish the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, well. It is not easy to try to look after people at a time when the economy is so challenged. Often I have stated that I can bring to my politics in this House my life experiences. I do not want to raise any remarks from other colleagues when I say that I was made redundant on three occasions and I can relate to the people facing those challenges. In fairness, it helps me to do my work and respond to the needs and the challenges of those families.
I would hope that the Minister will ensure that the Department will continue to respond in a responsible and caring way to ensure that those families affected by unemployment, especially sudden unemployment, are looked after as well as possible. There will always be restrictions and difficulties, but I always believe that the services of all Departments, especially the Department of Social and Family Affairs, should be consumer friendly and I would expect that such should continue to be the case.
Colleagues have commented on the need to look at different schemes and tweak their provisions. Reference was made to the back to education allowance and to the training allowance. We should be open — I hope the Department will be — to deal with these issues on a case by case basis.
I do not want to ambush the Minister on the number of claims being submitted. The rising unemployment figures have created particular difficulties and different challenges and some people have been left a little while waiting. The Minister has assured me and other colleagues that everything possible is being done in the Department to correct those issues and I would hope that she would continue to do so.
I compliment the local social welfare office in Tallaght. It is one of the more modern of the Department’s buildings and provides excellent service. Indeed, all those years ago when I was unemployed the people there were very kind to me within the regulations and as I said, I hope that they will continue to be people friendly.
In a debate like this a great deal can be said and colleagues have made all sorts of statements. Apart from being a Dáil Deputy for one of the Dublin constituencies, Dublin South-West, [588]happily, I am also Vice Chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Social and Family Affairs under the guidance of my colleague, Deputy Healy-Rae. I enjoy that work. I was a member of that committee for the first five years that I was lucky enough to be a Dáil Deputy and it was work I wanted to continue because it is where I am at politically. As I stated, I came from a background where, unfortunately, I and my family members faced unemployment. When I was involved in the community in Tallaght where there was much unemployment and a great need for jobs, this was a matter on which I focused. Throughout my community work and my political life, particularly through my membership of the Dáil over the past six years, I have taken a particular interest in this area and I think it is important that we would continue to do that.
The Minister will be aware that I will never be afraid to speak out on issues of concern to me. Reference has been made already in the debate this evening to fuel poverty and the joint committee will meet Department officials on that issue tomorrow. Party colleagues and, indeed, colleagues across the parties, have concerns. I am not a bit afraid to say that because it is important, especially when one goes out tonight and inhales the Dublin air. I love Dublin, by the way, and I am a true-born Dubliner, but it is very cold out there tonight and those in a vulnerable position such as the elderly and the unemployed will encounter particular difficulties and challenges as far as fuel poverty is concerned. It is important that we continue to raise this with the Minister. Former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, often reminded us that one must remember the little boats; we must do so now in particular given that even the big boats are struggling. I have always brought to my work in the Dáil my own views about social inclusion, reared, as I was, on the political knee of my predecessor, Chris Flood. It is important that we would make the point that fuel poverty is an issue which should be dealt with.
Like everybody else, I have concerns. In fairness to the Minister, she has been fair about the Combat Poverty Agency to which I heard colleagues make reference tonight. I would hope that everything will be done to ensure a transition which is to everybody’s advantage and that the staff in that organisation are facilitated and their expressed concerns are dealt with. I genuinely believe there is a need in a democracy for representation that continues to focus on the issues the organisation has faithfully represented over the years. The various other organisations, including CORI, that keep public representatives and Deputies fully informed about issues and add to our knowledge base should be supported by us. I would hope that process can continue.
On the point I made about unemployment, we should not take our eye off the ball as far as the need for job creation is concerned. While there is no question that the Department of Social and Family Affairs must respond where jobs are being lost — at a time when the economy is being challenged jobs will definitely be lost — the best way out of poverty and dependence on social welfare payments will always be more job creation. Even in a debate on social and family affairs, I am sure the Minister would want me to state the importance of focusing on the need to create employment and to ensure that the services of the State in the social welfare offices and in training agencies etc. are focused on getting people back to work and looking after those who genuinely seek employment. I would hope that message will go out clearly to all of the Departments and continue to be a strong plank as we move forward.
Reference has been made in the debate to payments for lone parents. I am sure the Minister will not mind me invoking our former colleague and Minister, the late Deputy Séamus Brennan, who, when I was chairman of the Fianna Fáil policy group on social and family affairs, certainly took a particular interest in that issue on which there was a long-standing debate and proposals made. That matter, like many of the others on the Minister’s desk, is a work in progress. There is a need to continue to look at the cases of people who find themselves in difficulties, and [589]almost in a poverty trap as far as payments and rent supplement are concerned, who are unable to get back to work and, therefore, jeopardise their payments.
Other lone parent issues raised in the debate under former Minister, the late Séamus Brennan, still must be dealt with. I take the view, without being flippant about it, that it is a nonsense to have council officials hiding in bushes to see who is leaving people’s houses at 6 o’clock in the morning. Those days should be well gone. There must be a better way of dealing with those matters. I would hope that the debate to which I refer is not over. It is a work in progress and it should be dealt with.
The Bill makes reference to the Money Advice and Budgeting Service. I do not know whether all Members will be aware that I live in Tallaght.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Would it be a shock to many Members?
Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I probably do not mention it too often.
As the Leas-Cheann Comhairle may know, in Tallaght there is a Citizens Information Centre office and a separate Money Advice and Budgeting Service office. I suppose people will be wondering when this Bill has passed and these issues are dealt with what sort of relationship will exist locally, whether the services will fuse and the offices will be brought together. It is fair enough to raise local matters. Certainly in Tallaght, and in every other constituency, both organisations provide tremendous services and are very popular. There has always been a strong demand for the services provided by the Money Advice and Budgeting Service and thank God it has been there in good times and difficult times to help families. Now, that times are challenging again it has a particular role to play. I hope the changeover and transition will be done in a seamless way to ensure families do not notice a difference apart from increased availability of services. I expect people want this to be the case and I state it in a clear way.
In recent times, I have had representations about pensions. Tallaght Welfare Society was one of the pre-budget and post-budget submission groups. As I stated to the Minister recently, it is interesting that when its representatives attended the post-budget submission meeting at the Department they sensed no anger or difficulties with the proposals. They do not mind me stating this. Earlier in the process they had told me that it was important to examine pensions.
I always made the point, bearing in mind the financial situation in which the country found itself, that the budget had to be about consolidation and ensuring that assistance to those in need, the vulnerable, the elderly and the unemployed would be maintained and improved as far as possible. Pensions are still on the political agenda and every family in the country is examining the issue. I suspect it will be on the Minister’s desk for some time and it is important that it is done.
I have heard comments about carers and as a member of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs and the Joint Committee on Health and Children, I have had a great deal of interaction with carers’ groups, particularly the one based in Clondalkin which operates in my constituency. Over the past number of years, we have made progress in this regard. It is like the old saying, “a lot done, more to do” but at the same time, good progress has been made. It will never be enough but we will have recognition that these services have improved enormously over a number of years. I know the Minister will want to continue to make as much progress as possible on this issue and I hope it will remain an important target for the Department.
In any debate on the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 one must discuss rent supplements. I suspect the Minister sees it as a work in progress. There is no question it is a problem that many families throughout the State avail of the service because for one reason [590]or another they do not own their own home and difficulties will always exist in this regard. I know we must have control and it will always be difficult given that it costs the State a large amount of money. At the same time, we must understand that many people are affected.
South Dublin and the areas in my constituency of Tallaght, Firhouse, Templeogue, Greenhills, Brittas and Bohernabreena are no different in this regard. The issue must be examined. The ideal situation is that some day somebody will bravely take a decision rather than pouring money into landlords’ coffers. I do not want to offend anybody but there must be a better way of providing accommodation for people.
People are entitled to aspire to own their own home. If they are not able to do so through their own resources, the local authority systems are in place. I am glad the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Finneran, recently announced improvements in this regard. If one goes to a housing estate one will always know which houses are rented. It is true in my constituency and in Deputy Catherine Byrne’s constituency, which I know because I was reared in Crumlin. I am not picking on any of these areas but one can always spot them because in many cases they do not get the same attention because the occupiers do not own them and know they will not be there forever. There is something wrong with a system in which people in rented accommodation drawing rent supplement stay in the same property forever. There must be a better way. The Minister mentioned the RAS system which has taken off and has been quite successful in south Dublin. It needs to be rolled out further and we need to get people in more settled and permanent accommodation.
Deputy Timmy Dooley and other colleagues spoke about the good news in the Bill. People across the floor are entitled to make their political points. We are all pleased that the Minister was able to come up with the funding to ensure the Christmas bonus would be paid again this year to 1.3 million social welfare recipients. I remember that earlier in the year suggestions were made, and I do not know what silly people did so, that the payment might not be made. People are unemployed and in all our communities people need social welfare benefits. The Christmas bonus has been extremely important for families and I suspect it will be even more so this year.
Those of us who live in Dublin know there is a great deal of pressure on families. The Dublin city centre Christmas lights were switched on a little early this year to attract people in and this will put pressure on those who can afford it and those who cannot. It is important the Christmas bonus scheme is maintained because people need it, including widows, widowers, pensioners, one-parent families and in particular long-term unemployed people. It is to the Minister’s credit that it has been done and I hope it will continue to be done. Any attempt to change the system would have caused a great deal of upset and bother. The Minister deserves credit and our praise.
The role of a Government Deputy is always difficult. I have often stated from these benches that sometimes — only sometimes — I would like to be on the Opposition benches for a few minutes so I could do things differently. I am never afraid to speak up on behalf of my communities and represent what is stated to me as I walk the streets in my constituency every day. People want us to be positive, look forward and ensure Ireland remains open for business and people remain in employment. At the same time, where social welfare benefits are required and where intervention is necessary for families we must ensure these funds continue to be made available.
As I stated previously, I will not patronise the Minister but like Deputy Catherine Byrne I was a great admirer of her when she was at the Department of Education and Science. This [591]has not stopped and I wish her well. She faces a big challenge, I know she will do the job and we expect her to do so.
Deputy Michael Ring: I will begin where Deputy O’Connor from Tallaght finished. Yesterday, I spoke to a woman I met on the street. She told me that as if things were not bad enough they have placed an eco-warrior or green tree on O’Connell Street. She said the lights were depressed like the country. Another woman told me she needs light bulbs for brightness but with the new light bulbs introduced by the Green Party she is depressed every day even with the lights on.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: They take a while to light up but then they shine brighter and longer.
Deputy Michael Ring: I can tell the Minister that they are depressing the country like the Government.
I am making an appeal to the Minister in regard to an anomaly in the social welfare system, an issue which I have raised before in the Dáil and at meetings of the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs. This relates to people who were obliged, for whatever reason, to cease working for a period. These individuals, who have paid PRSI over the years and made a contribution to the State, many of them commencing their working lives in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, have encountered problems, because they did not work for several years, when they come to claim their State contributory pension.
For example, a widow came to my clinic some days ago and told me how her husband had died, leaving her with a young family to support. When she sought assistance from the Department of Social and Family Affairs, she found she was ineligible because her husband was the owner of land and stock. As a result, she was obliged to go out to work in order to raise her family, which she did for many years. She was obliged to leave work for a time, after which she returned to employment. However, when the time came for her to claim the contributory pension, she found that a pro rata deduction was calculated over the 35-year period in respect of the time during which she was not in employment. This anomaly is wrong.
An amendment was made to the system some years ago whereby those who had made PRSI contributions for ten years were entitled to a full contributory pension. The woman to whom I referred worked hard and paid her contributions for longer than those who qualified after ten years. Yet a pro rata reduction was made to her pension entitlement. Will the Minister and her officials examine the numbers involved and the cost of addressing this anomaly? The numbers affected are not large and the current situation is most unfair.
The Minister is making a mistake in amalgamating the Combat Poverty Agency into the Department. The agency, which did a good job over the years in representing the poor, will now be deprived of its independence. Its representatives attended meetings of Oireachtas committees and always told it as it was. This decision should be reviewed.
I can show the Minister how she can make the savings required in her Department’s expenditure. It is quite simple. I tabled a parliamentary question today on the artists’ tax exemption. That scheme commenced in the 1994-95 tax year at a cost to the Exchequer of €6.5 million, increasing to €10.3 million in 1995-96, €13.2 million in 1996-97 and €19.8 million in 1997-98. By 2005, 2,220 people qualified for a tax exemption under the scheme at a cost to the Exchequer of €34.8 million. It is time these people, the patriots of the arts world, made a contribution to the State instead of running all over the world telling us how we should spend taxpayers’ money. The Minister for Finance should examine this scheme with a view to amending it in the forthcoming Finance Bill. It is a large amount of money which would do much to alleviate [592]fuel poverty, improve educational provision or enhance supports for the elderly and the sick. It is unacceptable that these people are not making a contribution to the State at a time of need.
We are back to the bad old days of queues outside social welfare offices in every town throughout the State, with the unemployment rate increasing to 260,000. I compliment the Minister for taking the advice I gave her on a particular matter, even though I was called a racist by another Minister for offering it. I was pleased the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, followed my lead on that occasion. The person who called me a racist should at least withdraw that accusation from the Dáil record. I asked the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, to investigate instances of people, whether from this State or abroad, defrauding the social welfare system. I had been made aware of a number of individuals not resident in the State who were claiming social welfare payments. The Minister took my advice and the following week, she introduced a requirement that such persons must report to their local social welfare office on a weekly basis. I compliment her for that.
Any person, whether a citizen of this State, the EU or elsewhere, who defrauds the social welfare system is taking away resources provided by Irish taxpayers and which are badly needed by those in genuine need. I will not name the Minister to whom I referred because I do not want to be the second Deputy put out of the Chamber by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle today, but I call on that Minister to apologise to me in this House. I was proven to be correct in my assertion on that occasion that there were people from outside the State defrauding the social welfare system. The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, proved me to be right in this regard. I call on her to put the necessary resources in place to combat fraud. Given the extent of the current pressures on the social welfare system, we need every single euro that can be saved and it is those who are defrauding the system who should be targeted for those savings.
I read in a newspaper report last week about the excessive levels of sick leave taken by staff in the Minister’s Department. It makes frightening reading. There are many people making applications for social welfare benefits, including jobseeker’s allowance, State pension, carer’s allowance and so on, who must wait months for their claim to be processed. A constituent contacted me today who was told by the Department that his application will not be processed until after Christmas. Where there is an oversupply of staff in one section of the Department, those superfluous staff should be moved to the sections that are under pressure. Additional staff are required to deal with applications for family income supplement and other benefits. It is taking too long to process applications for pensions, jobseeker’s allowance and so on.
During the summer a problem recurred that has been arising for years. I cannot understand the persistence of this difficulty given the colossal amount of money that was spent on computerising the functions of the Department. The problem is encountered by parents who come into their local social welfare office, whether in Westport, Ballina, Castlebar or anywhere else, seeking simple information on their entitlements for the purpose of furnishing that information to local authorities and vocational educational committees in respect of applications for third level maintenance grants for their children. However, local social welfare offices in Mayo were unable to provide that information and people were obliged to go to Sligo.
Any person in receipt of social welfare benefits should be able to obtain proof of that entitlement without delay, via computer, from staff in their local social welfare office. However, I am aware of cases where third level grant payments were delayed simply because the parents could not obtain that information in a timely fashion. Some of them are still waiting to obtain it. It is an awful waste of my time and the Department’s resources that I am obliged to table parliamentary questions in order to obtain that information on my constituents’ behalf. It makes no sense. It should be a simple matter for the Minister and her officials to address. I understand there was a problem with information being given out by staff but this was dealt [593]with by the Department. That is not what I am talking about. I refer to information being sought by recipients themselves, which they need in order to obtain third level grants. This is not an unreasonable request.
The changes in the provisions regarding child benefit will have a major effect on the parents of 17 year olds who intend to go to third level in two years’ time but who will no longer qualify for child benefit. A mother of triplets contacted me some days ago to say she will lose in the region of €9,500 as a result of this change. She was planning to use that money to put her children through third level education. This budget represents a serious attack on the family, on children and on those on low incomes. As a former spokesperson on social and family affairs, there were times over the years when it was difficult to speak against budgets which were generous in their provisions for families and children. With no disrespect to my colleague, Deputy Catherine Byrne, who is seated beside me, women in this House sometimes do not speak up enough for women. Child benefit is the one payment that women receive into their hands. As I have said on hundreds of occasions, a husband might be very rich and a great man outside the home for buying drink and dinners, but he might not give his wife or family a euro. That payment is given to a woman and it should not be touched. The money is hers. At present, there is a review of child benefit and whether everybody should be entitled to it. It is the one issue on which I will fight tooth and nail. If the Minister decided to take child benefit from women, even very rich women, I would bring the matter to the High Court. These people are paying their taxes and women are entitled to that money.
I have been a Member of the House for almost 15 years. This is a payment for women who stay at home. Many women stay in the home, raising their families while their husbands are working outside the home. It is bad enough that the State will not provide them with a pension when they reach pension age because they remained in the home. Every other section of society is looked after except the women who stay at home to look after their families. If the Minister took child benefit from such women, it would have an awful effect on women and children. It would be a bad day’s work for a Government to attempt to do it. I hope that will not happen, regardless of the review.
I also feel strongly about the jobseeker’s allowance. Again, I ask the Minister and her officials to review it. This is not the good old days; we are back to the bad old days. We had full employment in this country for the past number of years but we do not have it now. There are 260,000 people unemployed. That is 260,000 people who are not paying tax to the Exchequer. They want to work and would work if work was available. My point relates to when people apply for jobseeker’s benefit. The Minister has decreased the payment term from 15 months to 12. That is a mistake. When a person pays their contribution, they should be entitled to draw their payment for 15 months if there is no work available or they are unable to go to work. They previously paid their dues into the system. The change is wrong.
My constituents have spoken to me about the jobseeker’s allowance. When they go to the social welfare office, the officer will ask them if they have their three letters and if they have been looking for work. There is no work available. We must deal with the situation as it is. In the recent budget the Government imposed cutbacks, taking away people’s medical cards in the health sector and imposing 39 cuts in education. There was not one initiative in the budget to get people back into work. There was no initiative to retrain them or to get them into the workplace.
I spoke this week about the local authorities and the State. The local authorities should be very careful or another 100,000 people will be unemployed. The Government must talk to the local authorities. At this time of the year they think they can increase rates, water charges and all other charges and that small businesses will be able to take it. I am aware of small businesses [594]in Westport, Castlebar, Ballina and other towns that are on their knees. They are keeping people employed as a result of loyalty, because the people have worked for the business for 20 or 30 years. They do not wish to lose these employees but they are afraid that the final straw that will put them out of work will be if the local authorities decide they can impose new stealth taxes on businesses. They cannot.
The Minister for Social and Family Affairs must talk to her colleague, the Minister, Deputy Mary Coughlan, to find ways of keeping people in employment and keeping small businesses operating during this difficult time. Who are the banks squeezing in these bad days? They are squeezing small businesses, the people they should not squeeze. Small businesses have been the backbone of this country since the foundation of the State. Now, however, an increasing number of small businesses are going out of business. The Tesco, Dunnes Stores and other big superstores that arrive in an area might create employment in one corner but cause major unemployment in other corners. This must be examined.
I wish to discuss the fuel allowance. The one thing elderly people need is warmth. This country gets terrible weather. It rained throughout a terrible summer and people had to light the fire in their homes. The Minister gave a small increase in the fuel allowance but she must go further. The price of fuel is a scandal. Again, it is a case of rip-off Ireland. It is a cruel country. I do not know why there is no spirit when we are in difficulty. I can give a simple example. In the case of fuel, that is, diesel, petrol and oil for central heating, we had to force the suppliers to reduce prices even though oil was never as cheap on the world market. Look at the petrol pumps. I left Westport at 11 p.m. last night. I checked the fuel prices at each outlet until I reached the motorway. Every second station from Westport to Dublin had a different price for fuel but none of them was cheap. The Government should try to do something about this, particularly the price of oil for central heating for old people. It should make the suppliers reduce the price. The price of oil for central heating in Ireland is the dearest in Europe so we must tackle that.
I usually raise the free travel scheme when debating the social welfare Bill. What is happening with regard to putting a voucher scheme in place? We have raised this matter previously in the House and in the committee. There was a review at the time in that regard so perhaps the Minister will outline the current position. I am compiling a report for the committee on community and Gaeltacht affairs on rural transport. It is a big problem because people in rural areas do not have a bus service like Dublin Bus. I put down parliamentary questions last week to find out the subsidies being provided to Dublin Bus, Luas and for all transport in Dublin. I do not object to a subsidy for transport in Dublin provided there is equality for rural areas.
There is no equality with regard to transport. It is time the voucher scheme was introduced. It would not cost a fortune to administer it. The Department could provide a voucher or find some way of providing a means whereby people could at least use a taxi to bring them to collect their pension and bring them home. At present, the health service will not even bring them to hospital appointments, which is a disgrace. These are people on social welfare and the Minister should tackle this issue.
The other point that must be raised, and the Ombudsman referred to it recently, is the waiver for refuse collection services. This should be part of the free schemes, along with the fuel allowance, free telephone and television licence. Something should be done for elderly people. This is a serious problem nationally. The Ombudsman conducted a survey on this issue and she was very critical of the local authorities for not having a proper system in place. There should be a national waiver system; it could be a simple system. Something should be done for elderly people. It is fine for the green brigade. Of course, we want to have a green country and [595]everything to be above board but, by God, it is costing money, particularly for the poor who cannot afford it.
I ask the Minister to ensure that the most vulnerable in society are protected. This was not a good budget for the family, children or people on social welfare. The proof of the worth of a Government and a country is how well the less well-off are looked after in the bad days. It is easy to look after people in the good days, but how they are protected in the bad days is what counts.
Deputy Cyprian Brady: I welcome the opportunity to speak briefly on this Bill. It is probably one of the most important social welfare Bills for a number of years. The message in the Bill is that measures are being taken to ensure that those who need most support will get it. As other speakers have said, there are people who, due to events outside their control, find themselves in a position of having no option but to approach the State for aid.
Framing a budget is about planning for the forthcoming year with the resources one has. There is a general consensus that the forthcoming year will be a particularly difficult year. I congratulate the Minister on ensuring that adjustments are made to enable the Department to look after the expected increased numbers that will come to the Department for assistance. Given that an extra €1.25 billion will possibly be needed for unemployment payments alone, the adjustments in this Bill are particularly welcome. I note several details. There has been an adjustment in jobseeker’s benefit which has been reduced to 12 months and a change in the required contributions for qualification — a person is eligible if fewer than 260 have been paid. This will ensure those who have contributed the most will receive the most in return. In the present climate we could not continue with indefinite payments because it is unsustainable in cases where people have means to sustain themselves. This had to be examined and now is the time to do it.
However, the Minister for Social and Family Affairs has managed to balance these adjustments with continued supports for those on the lowest tier, for instance those on the jobseeker’s allowance and with a supplementary allowance. Let us consider some of the details. Some supports have not kept pace with the changes in people’s means in recent years. Despite this, the Minister managed to increase basic payments, including pensions and the carer’s and disability allowance. This builds on the firm foundation that the Government and its predecessor built in recent years. This side of the House makes no apology for the improvements made.
Consider previous budget discussions and debates and the acrimony arising from increases in certain payments for those on the lowest incomes. We had to fight to make improvements in some cases. We make no apology for increasing the old age pension in recent years. We will continue to build on that foundation. Consider the payment of the family income supplement scheme which has increased significantly in recent years. I see on a daily basis the way it enables families to maintain a certain lifestyle. The increased limits in this Bill from €500 to €1,250 are welcome.
Even where it has been necessary to make changes, alleviating measures have been put in place. Consider child benefit and the introduction and availability of special alleviating measures for children over 18 years of age in social welfare dependent families or families on low incomes. The legislation will ensure those who need most assistance will gain most. Such a balance is very difficult to create in any social welfare Bill, but this Bill achieves that balance.
Everyone recognises the work of the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, and citizens’ information centres. The rationalisation of these organisations will benefit and enhance the services they provide. Everyone accepts they provide a significant service to communities throughout the country and I see evidence of this in my constituency too. The rationalisation [596]and strengthening of those organisations and the synergy between the Citizens Information Service and the Money Advice and Budgeting Service will ensure that service continues for many years.
I refer to some of the smaller details in the Bill. There has been considerable discussion about fuel poverty and ways to tackle the problem. There is an 11% increase in the fuel allowance in the Bill and an extension of the fuel season to 32 weeks. This extension and the increase will mean some 300,000 households throughout the country will benefit from these measures. There must be a wider discussion in future. The cost of fuel and the direction in which it is moving has been mentioned, including the peaks and troughs in fuel prices. We continue to support those in greatest need of assistance and these measures will ensure we continue to keep a level playing pitch in this area.
There has been an increase in the number of people eligible to claim the back to school clothing and footwear allowance, which is welcome. The family income supplement scheme will increase the earnings threshold by €10 per child, which gives an increase of up to €6 per week per child. For those in receipt of social welfare payments for children, the qualifying child increase rises from €24 to €26 per week from next January. These changes aim to ensure those who need assistance most will receive it.
I worked in employment exchanges in the Department of Social and Family Affairs during the 1980s and I recognise the difference in the past ten or 15 years in the way the Department operates and the way it disseminates funds. There have been significant improvements in the delivery of the service provided by the Department. The Department must plan ahead if it is to continue to provide that service in what everyone accepts are challenging times.
The Minister, Deputy Hanafin, mentioned pensions in her speech and providing for pensioners in future represents a significant challenge. We must tackle this issue and, to be fair, the previous Administration and this Government have taken on this challenge. A number of groups are working on these matters at the moment and are attempting to foresee how we can ensure that in future the Department of Social and Family Affairs is able to maintain people’s lifestyle and ability to survive. We must take on this challenge.
The Government will spend €19.5 billion in 2009, which is an increase of €2.6 billion. The spend will support more than 1.7 million men, women and children in the country, which is a significant improvement on the position some 20 years ago. Look at how people’s expectations have risen in those 20 years. This has happened because we have managed to improve the system so much over the years. However, we must rationalise it now and take account of the climate and the budgetary position in which we find ourselves.
The Department of Social and Family Affairs is one of three Departments which has an increased budget this year. Every other Department has a decreased budget. The way this slice of the budget is distributed among those who need assistance is notable. Although we have managed to provide substantial assistance this year there had to be some changes to the way some schemes were administered. Everyone accepts those changes were necessary. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs framed the changes and adjustments in such a way that those most in need are maintained, while those who can afford it have been asked to contribute more, which is only fair. People accept that changes need to be made and although people’s income will be affected by some of the change, in the long run the changes will ensure we can continue to provide social welfare payments to the majority of those who need it.
[597]There have been changes to older people’s payments and benefits. The Government managed in recent years to ensure senior citizens, who built the country, would be looked after in future and it will continue to do so.
Deputy Martin Ferris: I wrote to the chief executive of IDA Ireland last January, Mr. Barry O’Leary, requesting a meeting about the decision to put the Tralee-based company Telestone on the market, and about growing unemployment figures. In my six years in this House I have pointed out that Kerry and the south west have been neglected by IDA Ireland and by the Government. There is almost twice the national average of unemployment in my constituency. Mr. O’Leary and two of his colleagues met with Deputy Jimmy Deenihan, Senator Ned O’Sullivan and myself in Tralee in April. They accept that what we had been saying is true, and they also recognised that Kerry had many advantages in terms of the promotion of foreign direct investment.
The latest figures from the CSO show that in the past year, the level of unemployment in Kerry has jumped by 78%. These figures are not surprising, given the downturn in the construction industry. The overall level of unemployment in Kerry has increased from 6,144 in October 2007 to 10,259 in October 2008. In Tralee, unemployment has jumped from 3,045 to 4,518, which is an increase of almost 1,500 people. In Listowel, unemployment has risen from 1,038 to 1,843 in one year. This has also led to an increase in emigration, as people find it impossible to get work in the area.
The vast majority of people leaving the country work in the construction sector. Most young people over the last seven years got a trade and went into the construction sector, and the local economy was built on this sector, which was unsustainable. Young people are now emigrating to England, the US or Australia to seek employment.
More IDA Ireland investment should have been targeted to Kerry over the years. There should have been a level playing pitch for the people of the west. From the replies to many of my parliamentary questions, it is clear that very few IDA Ireland companies have been established in Kerry, despite the fact that we have a technology park and an institute of technology. IDA Ireland appears to be devoting little effort to interesting companies to come to the county.
As 21% of the labour force work for IDA Ireland supported companies, more people in Kerry are employed by companies established under the Leader programme. These companies have a 70% success rate. We need to see more emphasis put on ensuring that indigenous industries are promoted and supported. That is one way to help the current situation. We are close to a 15% unemployment rate in Kerry, given the rise over the last 12 months. Before that, we were running at twice the national average.
Coastal communities in the region have suffered greatly with the closure of the drift net salmon fishing industry. That has contributed to the decline in the economy in rural and coastal communities. We need to see support for indigenous industries. IDA Ireland needs to pursue a policy of positive discrimination towards counties that are badly in need of investment. The best of our young population are currently leaving the country to seek employment. That is not good enough. Other Deputies from the constituency have been highlighting the problems in Kerry and the west since 2002.
[598]I await the Minister’s response. I urge that political direction be given and that positive discrimination used to bring jobs to Kerry and other areas that are suffering at the moment.
Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Jimmy Devins): I thank the Deputy for raising this matter on the Adjournment. The recent increase in the numbers on the live register is unwelcome and is an indication of the challenges that are now facing the labour market. The Government is taking specific measures to address these challenges and to ensure that job losses are minimised as much as possible. Our priority is to create the environment that will allow those who have lost their jobs to return quickly to the labour market. The enterprise development agencies, along with FÁS, are actively engaged in facilitating job opportunities in Kerry.
IDA Ireland is concentrating its efforts in the linked hub locations of Killarney in south Kerry and Tralee in north Kerry. IDA Ireland’s strategy for Kerry has been to promote the county as part of an integrated region with access both to the county population as well as to the expanded population of both the mid-west and south-west regions. There were 16 IDA Ireland supported companies in Kerry at the end of 2007, employing approximately 1,838 people. Based on the strengths of the region, IDA Ireland is particularly targeting the ICT, international financial services and globally traded business sectors via its network of overseas offices and project divisions.
Due to the high value projects targeted by IDA Ireland, companies that decide to visit Ireland have more sophisticated business requirements. The key needs in determining where they will potentially locate tend to centre on the following criteria: a high quality business environment with access to a large population base; close proximity to an international airport and top quality road infrastructure to allow ease of access; proximity to other similar types of companies; and a location adjacent to a third level institution and in a business and technology park, with high quality office accommodation and telecoms infrastructure.
These requirements may not be fully met in many towns and this can be inhibit the attraction of overseas investment. In Kerry, as elsewhere, there is a need to mobilise initiatives and resources on a regional rather than on a purely local basis, in order to compete effectively with other strong regions, cities and countries.
IDA Ireland is also working closely with educational institutions in the region to develop the skills necessary to attract high valued-added employment to the county. It is also working with FÁS to provide guidance for those in the workforce who are interested in up-skilling. In Tralee, IDA Ireland is marketing Shannon Development’s Kerry Technology Park. The institute of technology, located in the park, is providing a skilled work force for companies that wish to set up there. Enterprise Ireland has provided over €2 million in capital as well as other supports for the development of incubation facilities also located in the park. IDA Ireland continues to market all available land and buildings in the county, including its 12 acre business and technology park in Tiernaboul, Killarney.
New indigenous companies have also been established and have created new employment in the county. In 2007, an investment of €21 million was announced under the community enterprise centre scheme which will run from 2007 to 2009. It is expected to generate 330 new businesses and create over 1,500 new jobs. Enterprise Ireland will target funding at those communities in which job losses have been most acute. In September 2008, 70 new jobs were announced for Aetna in Castleisland. Earlier this year, it was announced that the Tralee-based company Donseed Limited is to invest €1.2 million to accelerate international growth. This investment will enhance the company’s in house research and development and sales functions, and create 26 new high-value positions at the company over the next two years.
[599]A full range of FÁS services to the unemployed is available in the FÁS offices in Tralee and Killarney, and these are further supported by a twice weekly clinic service in Cahirciveen, Castleisland, Dingle, Kenmare, Killorglin and Listowel. There are approximately 1,172 people currently participating in FÁS training programmes in Kerry, with 961 participating in community employment projects in Killarney and Tralee. The other programmes in the region include local training initiatives, supported employment, national learning networks and community training centres.
In response to changes in the labour market in 2008 and projections for 2009, the FÁS training centre in Tralee is currently finalising activity proposals next year. A new range of training initiatives will be rolled out for 2009, which includes a number of new short courses of approximately six weeks duration, which will be scheduled through contract arrangements at locations throughout County Kerry. These courses are aimed at providing additional skills to recently unemployed people with a view to equipping them quickly to re-enter the work force. It is envisaged that up to 300 training places will be available on these courses in Kerry.
An additional 1,000 places will be offered to the unemployed who wish to participate in self-financing evening courses. These courses will be offered at a number of venues in the county on Saturdays and on afternoons, as well as evenings. On-line training options using a number of learning supports will be available to approximately 700 people, with priority access for the unemployed. This measure will be facilitated by the new multi-media room, which was installed in the Tralee training centre in the middle of this year.
Approximately 100 traineeship places in specific skills areas are also planned between in-centre and outreach locations in Kerry next year. For those who have lost their jobs and also for those in employment, the importance of upskilling in the context of this economy’s competitiveness is vital. The skills of our workforce will need to be able to adapt quickly to meet the challenges posed by a rapidly shifting global economic market. The participation of ever-greater numbers of our population in life-long learning is essential to ensuring that this country’s economy remains adaptable against the background of the kind of economic challenges that we and most other developed nations are facing today. Through individually tailored training programmes, run both by FÁS and Skillnets, the Government is demonstrating its commitment to life-long learning for our workforce.
Taking all the above factors into account, it is clear that we are taking action to deal with the economic and employment challenges facing the people of Kerry and throughout the country.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this critical matter for the people of Limerick. I also thank the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform for attending the House for this Adjournment matter and for recognising how important the issue is. I express my deepest sympathy to the Geoghegan family on the tragic and brutal murder of Shane Geoghegan. He was a keen sportsman with Garryowen rugby club. This has been a very difficult time for the family. Shane is being waked tonight in Limerick and his funeral mass takes place tomorrow.
Like everyone else in Limerick, I was absolutely shocked at what happened. Shane was coming home having watched the Canada-Ireland rugby match on television when he was gunned down in a callous and brutal fashion by amoral and ruthless individuals. It defies logic and is a watershed moment which can never be allowed to recur. Some of the measures I am proposing may be difficult, but such measures are needed in difficult times. I am approaching it from the premise that we can never allow anything like this to happen again. A small minority [600]of individuals in Limerick are destroying life for everyone else. There have been four gangland murders already this year in Limerick.
I am proposing that the Government establish an Anvil-style operation, as was done after Veronica Guerin’s murder in Dublin. An assistant Garda commissioner should be appointed to head up a 24-hour armed surveillance unit to track these gangland criminals and ensure that they cannot move freely. A fully-resourced CAB unit should also be established in Limerick. We must get at the financial assets of such people, who must be prosecuted. In addition, a second judge should be appointed to the Circuit Criminal Court, which has a back-log of cases.
Some 40 people are currently in custody who are directly linked to criminal gangs in Limerick. Gangland membership must designated as a specific criminal offence. We should allow an assistant Garda commissioner or chief superintendent to provide evidence to a court, such as the Special Criminal Court. Everyone knows who is committing these crimes and we have to take these people out of circulation. Such action must be taken because they are creating a fear factor amongst the general public.
The Garda should be able to obtain exclusion orders in court in respect of these criminals so they cannot move into certain areas of the city. It is proving difficult to do this at the moment. There must be a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years for murder and ten years for possession of illegal firearms, without the possibility of bail. Many offences are being committed by people while out on bail. In addition, electronic surveillance of gangland criminals should be provided. Many of these crimes are being directed from prison. It is critical to extend to Limerick and other prisons the current pilot scheme in Portlaoise, blocking mobile phone coverage in such places of detention.
The witness protection programme must be put on a statutory footing and the right to silence must be qualified. It is critical that suspects cannot rely purely on the right to remain silent. Objections could be overcome by allowing videotapes of interviews in Garda stations to be used as evidence in court. This would ensure people could see when such people are remaining silent during questioning.
We need decisive action from the Government. Earlier today, the Taoiseach made vague statements, but the Government must provide a statement of intent. It must deal head on with gangland crime in Limerick. This can be done by providing an assistant Garda commissioner and a 24-hour armed surveillance unit in the city. It should be a specific criminal offence to be a member of a criminal gang anywhere in Ireland. An assistant Garda commissioner or chief superintendent should be able to provide intelligence and give evidence in a court, like the Special Criminal Court, to take these people out of circulation.
I sympathise with the Geoghegan family at this difficult time. We can never allow anything like this to happen again. The Government must come forward with specific remedies and actions in this regard.
Deputy Charles Flanagan: I also appreciate the presence of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in the House this evening. I regret the fact that this discussion is so short, but we will have another opportunity to debate this matter. It is 11 years since the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, promised that his Government would protect the people from gangland crime. He failed in this war, which the Government is losing. There have been 130 gangland murders in the past 11 years, but only 14 convictions. Despite the good efforts of the Garda Síochána, particularly in Limerick, this is an abysmal record nationwide. It is a poor conviction rate and too many innocent bystanders have lost their lives, the latest of whom was Shane Geoghegan, to whose family we extend our sympathy. The others include Brian Fitzgerald, Donna Cleary, Anthony Campbell, Darren Coughlan and Seán Boland. People [601]are terrified, while criminals act with impunity, regularly handing down their own form of twisted justice.
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and his colleague, the Minister for Defence, Deputy O’Dea, have spoken on national television about sections 71, 72 and 73 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006, but those provisions are not working. They are unworkable. There have been no prosecutions taken since they were enacted and this is the most important legislation in the Minister’s armoury. There have been no prosecutions taken, much less convictions recorded. What we need is 24-hour monitoring and surveillance of a type that again will require further legislation as adverted to by no less a person than the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, more than a year ago. It has not happened. We are waiting for years for a DNA database and it has not happened. We really need new laws to prevent criminals from associating and operating in certain areas. Deputy O’Donnell referred to exclusion orders and we will have a chance to deal with that issue at a later stage.
I remind the Minister we need a mechanism to arrest and charge these people and take them out of circulation because too many lives have been lost. The adverse effects in terms of mayhem, destruction and murder on not only the people of Limerick but also the people of parts of Dublin and many parts of this country is such that what we have is simply insufficient.
Ultimately, when convictions are recorded and when judges hand out lengthy prison sentences, we have the situation as in Portlaoise in my own constituency where it is reported widely as fact, and this is not rumour, and mention has been made in court under sworn testimony, that these crime bosses and gang lords continue to operate their evil empires from behind prison bars. This is simply unsustainable. The mobile phone blocking technology in Portlaoise is not working, pilot scheme or no pilot scheme. It is not happening. We have referred to this issue over a long number of months as being——
Deputy Dermot Ahern: It is in the Midlands Prison and it is working.
Deputy Charles Flanagan: It does not matter where it is because it is still not working. The Keane-Collopy gang are in the Midlands Prison and the McCarthy-Dundon gang are in Portlaoise because these people are so vicious and so vile in the perpetration of their heinous activities that they cannot even be housed in the one security prison. I ask the Minister to act in this matter because the attitude to date has been far too laid back and far too blasé. What the people want is confidence in a system, and they do not have that currently.
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am grateful to both Deputies for raising this matter. When we discuss this issue on Thursday, we will have a better opportunity to consider some of the valid points raised by Deputy O’Donnell in particular. I do not accept that there is a laid-back attitude when one considers that this House passed significant legislation in 2006 and 2007.
Shane Geoghegan was a respected young man brutally gunned down in the early hours of last Sunday morning. This young man was a valued member of a close-knit community to which he contributed so much. His tragic death is a stark reminder of the callous disregard that some in the community have for human life. My deepest sympathy goes to his family and friends at this very difficult time.
There is nothing I can say which I would expect to console them in any way in their great loss. However, they are entitled to know that all the resources of the State will be used to bring the despicable cowards, the scum involved in this killing, to the justice which they deserve. This is not the time for political points scoring nor is it a time to pretend that there are instant off-the-shelf solutions which at a stroke can remove this type of evil completely from our midst. [602] The fight against those involved in gangland crime is going to be long and must be waged relentlessly. I assure the House that this Government will continue to provide all the necessary resources, financial and legislative, to tackle the problem of gangland crime head on.
This morning, the Taoiseach and I met the Garda Commissioner to discuss general criminal justice issues and, in particular, the ongoing investigation into the brutal killing of Shane Geoghegan. We are determined that his murderers will be caught and put behind bars. The Commissioner briefed the Taoiseach and me on the latest developments in the intensive investigation under way in Limerick. He said that all investigative resources which are required to bring the investigation to a successful conclusion are available to the Garda Síochána. Subsequent to our meeting, the Commissioner travelled to Limerick to meet the regional assistant commissioner for the southern region, including Limerick, and the investigation team to discuss directly with them the progress of the investigation. The Commissioner confirmed that the Garda Síochána has at its disposal the laws and resources necessary for it to carry out its duties effectively in respect of this case and of the wider issue of criminal gangs in Limerick.
I assure Deputy Flanagan there is and has been 24-7 constant covert and overt surveillance in Limerick over recent years as part of Operation Anvil. We informed the Commissioner that any additional assistance needed, whether legislative or by way of resources, to deal with the Limerick criminal gangs will be provided. Deputies will accept that significant Garda resources have been put into Limerick and this has been acknowledged by the Opposition and by independent commentators. In the past year alone there has been a 12% increase in Garda numbers in Limerick, from 422 to 474, and a 43% increase since 2003.
There is a high level of surveillance in place. Divisional 24-hour armed patrols, supported by the emergency response unit and the regional support unit established in September, supplement regular Garda patrols. Patrols are augmented by the deployment of personnel from outside the division as required. There are 27 gardaí on mountain bikes in Limerick. There is no greater concentration of such gardaí except in Dublin and Cork. The Garda Síochána continues to undertake a range of investigations and operations to curb organised criminal activity in the general Limerick area, concentrating on depriving the criminals of the profits of their criminality. This includes activity by local detective units in conjunction with locally based divisional asset profilers and the Criminal Assets Bureau. Last May, the Garda Síochána carried out searches of a wide range of premises as part of Operation Platinum, following which the CAB has sought a number of court orders. I am happy to have secured a 20%, €1.5 million, increase in funding for the CAB for this year.
This level of activity is having results, although, sadly, there are setbacks. To date in 2008 there have been five murders in Limerick, and persons have been charged in respect of two of these. Two of these murders have been by firearms and a person has been charged in respect of one of these. In the State as a whole, there were 18 murders in 2007 involving a firearm, compared with 27 in 2006, a reduction of 33%.
The Garda Síochána will continue to receive a significant level of resources. Thus, while a ring-fenced allocation of €20 million was provided this year for Operation Anvil, in spite of difficult budgetary circumstances, €21 million is being provided in the 2009 Estimates to enable the operation to continue with targeted disruption of serious and organised criminal activity in Limerick and throughout the country. I made it an absolute condition of my Estimate for 2009, even though I have fewer resources, to ring-fence €21 million for Operation Anvil.
There will be a continued increase in the personnel strength of the Garda Síochána. Its attested strength will increase to almost 14,900 by the end of 2009 from its current attested strength of 14,267. This will mean an increase of more than 1,100, 8%, over this year and next [603]year. There are 1,100 recruits in training, and 400 new recruits will be taken on in 2009. These numbers will increase significantly the policing hours available to in excess of 1 million. While there will be a planned reduction in the overtime budget from €108 million in 2008 to €80 million in 2009, this will be more than offset by the increase in numbers. Civilianisation is also making significant strides. In the past 21 months, the number of civilians employed by the Garda Síochána has increased by 59% to 2,038, including an increase of 20% in 2008 to date.
Just as important as the resources available to the Garda Síochána is the effectiveness of the legal powers available to the force and the treatment which criminals can expect from the criminal justice system. There have been some assertions and suggestions which do not stand up to scrutiny. I say this with due respect. For example, Deputy Flanagan calls for a mandatory minimum murder sentence of 25 years. Our law already provides for a mandatory life sentence for murder. Prisoners serving a life sentence already serve very long sentences. The average sentence for this group has almost doubled. It was an average of 15 years during the years 2006 and 2007, compared with the decade 1975 to 1984 where the average was only 7.7 years.
Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Minister is being selective.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: It has progressively increased to an average of 15 years.
Deputy Charles Flanagan: Over the past two years.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: I want to assure the House that prisoners who are considered a risk to the public serve well in excess of the average of 15 years. I assure the House that no one who will come before me will get out before a considerable number of years — well above the average — in regard to murder for organised crime.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: They have taken human life.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: Life sentence prisoners are reviewed by the Parole Board on a number of occasions before any substantial concessions are recommended. Furthermore, they continue to serve their life sentence even when given extended periods of temporary release and can be returned to prison if they breach their conditions or if they pose a threat to the public. In considering such cases, my approach would not generally differ from that urged by Deputy Flanagan but a change in the law is not necessary.
As regards participation in a criminal organisation, this is already an offence since the introduction of the Criminal Justice Act 2006. Any person who participates in, or contributes to, any activity of a criminal organisation is guilty of an offence. Our law provides for trial without jury. Where it is considered necessary to secure the effective administration of justice, a case can be heard before the Special Criminal Court on the recommendation of the DPP, to whom the power is available.
We have already made clear our intention to proceed with legislation which is intended to provide a clear statutory basis for particular forms of existing Garda surveillance operations and allow for the use of the results of surveillance as evidence, which should be particularly useful in counteracting gangland activities. There is already since 1993 a clear legislative basis for the authorisation of telecommunications intercepts. Heads of a Bill on covert surveillance have been prepared and circulated, and it is my intention it will be submitted to the Government next week with the request for approval to draft a Bill. I am also proceeding with other criminal justice legislation measures, such as allowing for the creation of a DNA database. In circumstances where there is a contraction of Exchequer funding, I was delighted to be able to earmark €18 million for the new DNA database and the new forensic science laboratory to follow on from the legislation we will be bringing forward.
[604]I keep the witness protection programme under constant review and any funding that is necessary for the programme is made available. The Garda Commissioner has reservations about putting the programme on a statutory basis, as had the previous Commissioner. The question of whether the witness protection programme is statutory or otherwise is unlikely to affect the willingness of witnesses to come forward. What we have to recognise is that the willingness or otherwise of witnesses to come forward is dependent on a wider range of factors than simply the level of protection the Garda can offer a witness under the programme, still less whether the programme is statutory. It has to be recognised that in many cases possible witnesses simply do not wish to leave the area where in many cases they have lived all their lives and where their family and friends also live.
Another issue is with regard to the abuse of the right to silence, which Deputy O’Donnell raised. It is already the case — we dealt with this recently in this Chamber — that the law provides that inferences may be drawn at a person’s trial from the fact that a person remained silent when asked a question by an investigating garda. Inferences can also be drawn from a failure to account for marks, objects and so forth, and from a failure to account for being at a particular place. In addition, since last year inferences may be drawn from a failure to mention during interview certain facts that are later relied on at trial by the defendant.
As well as a high and unceasing level of front-edge activity, community policing is a very important part of the Garda response and such units have been increased in strength in Limerick. CCTV cameras are now working constantly in most of the major estates in Limerick.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Not everywhere.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: There is now a total of 90 community gardaí in the city. More broadly, Limerick southside and northside regeneration agencies have launched ambitious plans for action on an unparalleled scale to lift the disadvantaged areas of Limerick out of the cycle of disadvantage and despair.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: There is no Government funding to tackle crime.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Limerick City Joint Policing Committee was one of the first to be established and is working well, and gardaí are working closely with the local authority and other members of the committee. The Government is determined to provide the Garda with the resources and legal tools it needs to tackle the challenges of criminality which we saw demonstrated in Limerick last weekend.
On the wider issue, the House will recognise that many significant initiatives have been taken, aimed at the regeneration of communities in Limerick. I would ask all those involved to overcome this dreadful setback and continue their efforts to bring hope to the people of Limerick. We cannot allow the evil deeds of a few to thwart the will of the vast majority.
Deputy James Bannon: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for affording me time to discuss this matter which is of the utmost importance to County Longford, namely, the urgent need for the Minister for Defence to reverse his decision to close Connolly Barracks, Longford, in light of the adverse effects on the economic viability of County Longford which will result from the loss of 180 full-time jobs and approximately 160 reservist positions and the disruption which will be caused by the proposed relocation of Army personnel and their families, who are an integral part of our local community in Longford.
[605]There is one aspect of this closure that bothers me more than anything else. In the presence of Deputy Peter Kelly, the Minister, Deputy Willie O’Dea, gave assurances that the barracks would not be closed and Deputy Kelly vowed on a number of occasions that, as long as he was a Deputy, the barracks would remain open. This strikes me as a double act of the greatest possible hypocrisy — I make no apology for saying so.
Government hypocrisy was also evident when I was barred by the Minister, Deputy O’Dea, from attending a meeting to discuss the future of the barracks, to which he of course invited the two Fianna Fáil representatives for Longford-Westmeath. Such a lack of openness and transparency was rich but not unexpected coming from a Minister who last December attacked the tribunal’s investigation of the then Taoiseach. It is obvious there is one law for the Minister, Deputy Willie O’Dea, and his pals in Fianna Fáil and another for everybody else. When he gets his own house in order and comes clean on that matter, he can lecture the people of Longford about their barracks, as he tried to do in the past couple of weeks.
The Minister’s single-party meeting was held while Army wives protested in great numbers at the gates of Leinster House at his failure to consider their position. Why all the secrecy? What has the Minister to hide? Why was he scared to allow the elected Fine Gael Dáil and Seanad representatives to take part in these important discussions which failed to achieve a reversal of the shameful and ill-thought-out decision to close the barracks? Where were his words of bravado that assured the people of Longford the barracks would not be closed? What exactly are the financial savings made by closing this barracks?
It is unrealistic of the Government not to acknowledge the bigger picture. Furthermore, it is difficult to see how much savings can be achieved, particularly if a site of this size — up to 14 acres — will be put on the open market in the midst of a serious economic downturn. It is my strong belief that the economic savings made by the proposed closure will be minimal and non-cost-effective. This is without taking into account the human and social aspect of the proposal.
Perhaps a buyer has already been found for Connolly Barracks. If there is such a buyer, what plans have been made for the future of this historic premises? Government promises may be cheap to the Minister and easy to break, but when one considers the effects on a whole community, they are inexcusable. The closure of the barracks is the equivalent of the loss of two major industries to the county. The Minister is stripping Longford of its economic prosperity and its unique heritage, and destroying part of our heritage.
This is a savage cutback which will provide little in the way of revenue to the Exchequer given the downturn in the economic return from the sale of such properties, but it will devastate the economy of County Longford. According to PDFORRA, the closure will most likely see an increase in spending to upgrade barracks to accommodate those who are moved as a result of the closure. This is another example of the Government’s lack of joined-up thinking. It decentralises and re-centralises on a whim, without full consideration of the consequences.
Connolly Barracks is an integral part of Longford town. It is situated on an historic site going back to 1619 and is at the same time a modern and vibrant working barracks that employs 180 full-time personnel and contributes more than €6 million per annum to the local economy. It was established as a cavalry barracks in the 18th and 19th centuries and was renamed Seán Connolly Barracks in 1922, when Seán Connolly and Seán McEoin drove the British army out of Longford. It took Deputy Peter Kelly and the Minister, Deputy Willie O’Dea, to drive the Irish Army out of Longford barracks in 2008. Why is the Government closing a vibrant working barracks which employs 180 full-time personnel and another 100 plus reservists, all of whom are members of our community and contribute to the viability of shops, hotels, public houses and other business in the area?
[606]I plead with the Minister to reconsider this ill thought-out decision to close the barracks. It is important to a county that has been neglected by successive Fianna Fáil Governments. It has lost industry and jobs such as at Cardinal Health. The Government closed the courthouse in Granard. It nearly got its way in closing the courthouse in Longford town but for a Fine Gael motion at the county council which saved it. Will the Minister ask at Cabinet for this decision to be reversed? It will have a devastating effect on the entire community.
Acting Chairman: Thank you Deputy. I call on the Minister to respond.
Deputy James Bannon: I am disappointed that Deputies Mary O’Rourke and Peter Kelly who attended the recent meeting about the barracks are not in the Chamber tonight.
Acting Chairman: The Deputy is well over his time.
Deputy James Bannon: I would have hoped they would have supported my calls on behalf of the people of Longford in this matter.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: I am taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of the Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O’Dea.
The consolidation of the Defence Forces formations into a smaller number of locations is a key objective of the White Paper on Defence 2000. The dispersal of personnel over an extended number of locations is an impediment to essential collective training. It also imposes increased and unnecessary overheads on the Defence Forces in barrack management, administration, maintenance and security.
The consolidation process is designed to facilitate higher training standards, while also freeing up under-utilised resources and personnel for operational duties. The funding previously realised from the disposal of surplus barracks and properties has, together with pay savings——
Deputy James Bannon: What savings? How much will be saved?
Acting Chairman: Deputy Bannon, please.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: ——provided some of the resources required for infrastructure, training area development and equipment procurement. In this regard, the White Paper stated “the thrust of the Government decisions in the White Paper is based on their recognition of the necessity to enhance the equipment and infrastructure available to the Defence Forces”. These barrack closures move the Government closer to achieving the vision of the Defence Forces set out in the White Paper.
While the closure of barracks and the sale of the properties have provided funding for investment, it was never the driving factor for the consolidation of defence infrastructure. The White Paper acknowledged the current spread of barracks gave rise to significant inefficiencies in manning and organisation that needed to be addressed.
Deputy James Bannon: Will the Minister furnish us with the figures for the savings made? No one on the Government side has told us what they are. What are the savings?
Acting Chairman: Deputy, please.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: Moreover, as has been pointed out in many independent reports on the Defence Forces, the primary driver for barrack organisation and personnel deployment is the efficient and effective delivery of military capabilities.
[607]As the Minister for Defence has said in response to many questions in the House, Defence Forces properties are kept under constant review in terms of addressing Defence Forces requirements and ensuring its most appropriate organisation, taking account of operational requirements.
The current plan has been put together in close consultation and co-operation with the Defence Forces general staff. It provides an overall package that will serve the needs of the Defence Forces into the future. The development and increased capability of the modern Defence Forces, when taken together with the improved security situation along the Border, has removed the rationale for having seven Border barracks and posts and provided this opportunity for consolidation of units in a smaller number of locations.
Connolly Barracks, Longford, consists of 14 acres of land in the centre of the town and has 130 military personnel and eight civilian personnel. The barrack was reopened specifically to provide for the requirement for Border security duties due to the Northern situation.
Deputy James Bannon: It was always open.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: With the Good Friday dispensation and the welcome regularising of the security situation, the operational requirement to have troops deployed so widely in seven military posts along the Border no longer exists.
On the northern side of the Border, the chain of British military bases has already been removed. Closing the four smaller Border posts, including Connolly Barracks, Longford, and consolidating them into the existing larger units will provide a major benefit in terms of efficiency and effectiveness in Defence Forces formations and training.
The need to consolidate the Defence Forces has been signalled for many years. While Defence Forces personnel are understandably saddened by the closure of Connolly Barracks, they also understand the need for this action and know the benefits in military training and development to which the consolidation will give rise.
The military authorities have assured the Minister for Defence a range of available accommodation and facilities are in place and that any additional arrangements required will be in place by the time personnel will have to transfer to their new locations. A process of advising and assisting personnel moving to new locations is already in train. The military authorities advised staff on the details of the proposals on the day after the budget. The Army Chief of Staff has visited each of the barracks concerned to meet the personnel. Any staff concerns arising can be put forward through partnership and representative arrangements. The Minister has asked me to assure the House that any issues arising for both civilian and military personnel will be addressed in an appropriate manner.
Regarding Deputy Bannon’s argument on the impact on the local economy, it is important to stress there will be no job losses. All the existing military and civilian personnel based in Connolly Barracks will continue to hold their jobs. The Minister and the Department of Defence do not expect any major negative economic impact on the local communities.
Deputy James Bannon: That is wishful thinking.
Deputy Dermot Ahern: This is because most of the personnel serving in these installations live in the areas and will, based on previous experience with barrack closures, continue to do so, thereby minimising the impact.
The Minister accepts this was not an easy decision and obviously the Government’s desire is to limit the adverse impact this relocation will have on personnel. However, the need to consolidate Defence Forces formations in a smaller number of barrack locations has been [608]evident for some time. These proposals are designed to improve the efficiency of the Defence Forces organisation so as they can continue to discharge the roles assigned to them by Government more effectively.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.50 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 12 November 2008.
———————— The following are questions tabled by Members for written response and the ministerial replies as received on the day from the Departments [unrevised]. ————————Questions Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, answered orally.
Questions Nos. 9 to 89, inclusive, resubmitted.
Questions Nos. 90 to 96, inclusive, answered orally.
Question No. 97 answered with Question No. 95.
98. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the details of incentives to address the issue of children living in consistent poverty; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39411/08]
101. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the details of incentives to address the issues of families living below the poverty line; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39402/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 98 and 101 together.
The continued reduction and eventual elimination of poverty and in particular child poverty remains a top priority for the Government.
The latest poverty statistics from the EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC), released in November 2007, indicate that there was a decrease in the rate of consistent poverty from 8.2% in 2003 to 6.5% in 2006 and that the consistent poverty rate for children fell from 11.7% in 2003 to 9.8% in 2006.
The risk of a child being in consistent poverty depends on a number of factors including household composition. For example, families comprising two adults and between one to three children had a consistent poverty rate in 2006 of 5.1%; below the national rate of 6.5%. In contrast lone parents are a high-risk group, with 27.3% of lone parent households in consistent poverty in 2006. The EU-SILC results for 2007, will be available shortly.
[610]Significant progress has already been achieved in reducing child poverty in Ireland over the past decade and, in spite of current economic difficulties, the Government is determined to continue this work. The recent Budget provided for a range of measures costing over €56 million to benefit children and families and increases of between 3 % and 3.8 % in the basic payment rates have been provided for next year, ahead of the projected rate of inflation for 2009, which is 2.5%.
These measures include an increase of €2 in the qualified child increase payable with social welfare payments bringing the rate up to €26 per week from January 2009; an increase of €10 per week per child in all Family Income Supplement (FIS) income thresholds giving an increase of up to €6 per child per week, from January 2009; and an increase of €50 per week in the income threshold for the back to school clothing and footwear scheme to enable more families qualify. These increases will mean that the high level goal of maintaining the combined value of child income support measures at 33% to 35% of the minimum adult social welfare payment rate will continue to be met next year (at present it ranges between 33.4% and 43.7% depending on family size, income and ages of children).
It is generally accepted that one of the most effective routes out of poverty for people in the active age groups is through paid employment. The Department of Social and Family Affairs has a range of education and employment supports available to people in receipt of welfare payments. The overall aim is to provide an incentive and support to unemployed people, particularly the long-term unemployed, lone parents, and sickness related welfare recipients to return to the active labour market either by taking up employment or becoming self-employed. This is done through the operation of programmes including the Back to Education and Back to Work Allowance Schemes. The Activation and Family Support Programme and the Second Chance Education Opportunities Scheme offer supports to social welfare customers and other disadvantaged persons to assist them to improve their employability and personal and family situations.
Additionally the earnings disregards across a range of schemes for people of working age are designed to facilitate people in receipt of welfare payments in entering the workforce by enabling them retain entitlement to their payments until they become established in employment.
People with families who are in lower paid employment may receive the Family Income Supplement which plays a significant role in increasing household income and providing an incentive to remain in, or take up, employment. Currently the weekly average payment for a one child family on FIS is approximately €99.
Child Benefit, and the policy of significantly increasing its rate recent years, also acts as an incentive to return to work as persons are assured that a significant portion of child-related income will continue to be paid when they move from welfare to work.
99. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the increase in the take-up of the family income supplement payment since budget 2008. [39487/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Family Income Supplement is designed to provide support for people with families who are on low earnings. This preserves the incentive for them to remain in employment in circumstances where they might only be marginally better off than if they were claiming other social welfare payments. FIS is a central element of a programme of reforms targeted specifically at addressing child poverty.
The Department has consistently publicised the FIS scheme in order to maximise uptake by qualified families. Significant improvements in the qualifying income limits and ongoing aware[611]ness campaigns have resulted in a strong upward trend in the level of new and renewal claims. Currently nearly 26,400 families, with 53,600 children, benefit directly from FIS payments. Families can get FIS payments of between €20 and €600 a week, depending on their income and the size of their family. The average weekly payment is currently €131.86.
Improvements to the family income supplement scheme, including the new increased income limits announced in Budget 2008, mean that it is now easier for families to qualify under the scheme. In 2007 the Department received 36,900 new and renewal FIS claims compared to 33,000 in 2006 and 23,000 in 2005 — an increase of over 60% on 2005 and 11% on 2006. In the first 10 months of 2008, 37,100 new and renewal claims were received compared to some 33,900 in the same period in 2007 — an increase of over 9%. In the 3 weeks since the announcement of the 2009 budget in October, 2,672 new and renewal applications have been received. In the same period last year a similar number, (2,685) was received.
With regard to the level of take up generally, it is not possible to estimate from administrative sources the number of families who would be eligible but do not apply for their FIS entitlements. However, the department has commissioned a research project to examine factors behind the level of take up for the scheme. This is at the final stage at present and is expected to complete shortly.
100. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when she will provide for a personal advocacy service in respect of people with disabilities; the specific target date she is working to; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39561/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The statutory basis for the introduction of a personal advocacy service under the Citizens Information Board (CIB) was provided for in the Citizens Information Act, 2007. However, having regard to the current budgetary circumstances, it will not be possible to proceed with this next year.
The provision of an advocacy service remains a priority for this Government. In this regard, significant resources have been provided since 2005, and will continue to be made available under the auspices of the Citizens Information Board for the development and provision of advocacy services for people with disabilities. Funding of €1.8 million was provided in 2008 for service developments which include advocacy services. This brings the total funding for advocacy services to €6.1m for the period 2005 to 2008.
The Citizens Information Board has developed a Community and Voluntary Sector Advocacy Programme and has funded 46 separate advocacy projects. The overall focus of the programme is on representative advocacy for people with a disability.
Projects either operate within a specific geographic area or are focused on a particular disability type. Each of the projects poses different challenges, some requiring more intensive work with smaller caseloads while others have larger caseloads with shorter periods of client contact.
Up to the end of June 2008, 3,241 members of the public have availed of the services provided by the projects. The breakdown per year is as follows:
[612]The Citizens Information Board is monitoring the programme to ensure that the projects are operating in accordance with the Board’s advocacy guidelines. It is planned to undertake a full evaluation of the Community and Voluntary Sector Advocacy programme in 2010.
The Citizens Information Board also provides advocacy through the Citizens Information Services focusing on access to services, welfare entitlements and employment rights. This type of mainstream advocacy is also open to people with disabilities and the Community and Voluntary Sector Advocacy programme is creating close links with the Citizens Information Services to ensure that people with disabilities are encouraged and supported to use the mainstream services where possible.
The advocacy capacity within the Citizens Information Services is being strengthened through the provision of Advocacy Resource Officers who work to build the capacity of information providers to advocate on behalf of clients. There are nine Advocacy Resource Officers in operation across the Citizens Information Services network.
I am satisfied with the developments undertaken to provide advocacy services for people with disabilities through the Citizens Information Board. The Department will continue to work with them to further enhance advocacy services for all citizens including those with disabilities.
Question No. 101 answered with Question No. 98.
102. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the projected savings arising from her proposal to place the Money Advice and Budgeting Service under the control of the Citizens Information Service. [39499/08]
105. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the action she is taking to assist people to combat the prevalence of debt in the current economic climate; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39437/08]
114. Deputy Pádraic McCormack asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the steps she has taken to provide additional supports to the Money Advice and Budgeting Services as outlined in the programme for Government in view of the current economic climate; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39432/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 102, 105 and 114 together.
The MABS provides a high quality personal service to the public and makes a difference to peoples lives. However, it has been recognised for some time that the Service needs a proper legislative basis and structure. The Programme for Government envisaged that such a new structure for the MABS would involve strong national leadership and would maximise the current local voluntary involvement in the service.
The Government has decided that this can best be achieved by placing the MABS with the Citizens Information Board. The MABS and Citizens Information Centres complement each other well as both are involved in providing information, advice and advocacy services to the public. In addition, the Citizens Information Board has a long association with the MABS at both national and local level and was involved in establishing some of the original MABS pilot projects.
[613]There will be no change in the status of the 53 independent MABS companies, nor in the employment status of their 240 employees that provide the service at local level.
It is not envisaged that significant savings or additional costs will arise on the assignment of the provision of the MABS to the Citizens Information Board. Rather the intention is, in line with the Programme for Government, to provide strong management support to the local voluntary companies in the provision of a high quality service to meet the needs of people encountering debt difficulties in today’s society. However cost efficiencies will be realised in the medium to longer term through the integration of support services such as administration and IT.
The legislative provisions to give effect to the proposed changes are contained in the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 which is before Dail Eireann today.
103. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs further to Parliamentary Question No. 110 of 25 June 2008, the involvement her Department has had with the Office of the Minister for Children in the study of children engaged in inappropriate care roles as per the commitment in Towards 2016; if this study was commenced in July 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39566/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Towards 2016 includes a commitment to study the extent to which children undertake inappropriate care roles and the impact on their lives. The Office of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs has the lead role in relation to this study, which aims to develop mechanisms to identify young carers aged 5-17 years, the positive and negative impact of caring on their lives, and to make recommendations for ways in which they can be assisted.
Officials from my Department worked closely with the Office of the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs with regard to the development of the structure of study and throughout the tendering process. The study commenced in October 2008 and is being undertaken by the Child and Family Centre, National University of Ireland, Galway.
104. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has had discussions with the EU Commission on the issue of travel concessions for Irish pensioners in the UK in the context of a senior euro card focused on free or concessionary travel facilities for the elderly throughout the European Union; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39332/08]
106. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if, in view of the recent decision of the European Committee on Social Rights regarding the exclusion of non-resident Irish pension holders from the free travel scheme for older persons in Ireland, she will review her views on the establishment of a European wide senior euro card; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39333/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 104 and 106 together.
The free travel scheme is available to all people living in the State aged 66 years or over and to people receiving certain disability or care payments.
Proposals to extend the free travel scheme to Irish born people living abroad and those receiving pensions from my Department have been examined and, in this regard, officials of the Department have engaged in discussions with EU Commission officials. However, it has [614]not been possible to progress the matter as, under EU legislation, discrimination on grounds of nationality is prohibited.
In addition, the European Commission has indicated that to extend the scheme to people in other Member States who are in receipt of an Irish pension could also be considered discriminatory.
More recently the European Committee on Social Rights found that there was no violation to the European Social Charter following a complaint on the difference in treatment between residents and non-residents in access to the free travel scheme. I have no plans to extend the Free Travel Scheme.
Question No. 105 answered with Question No. 102.
Question No. 106 answered with Question No. 104.
107. Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the instructions given by her or her officials to community welfare officers in respect of refusing mortgage interest supplement in the circumstances in which the applicant has overstated their income. [39560/08]
154. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the changes she will make to the qualifying criteria for private mortgage interest supplement. [39513/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 107 and 154 together.
The supplementary welfare allowance scheme, which is administered by the community welfare service of the Health Service Executive on behalf of the Department, provides for a weekly or monthly supplement to be paid in respect of mortgage interest. The purpose of the mortgage interest supplement is to provide short term income support to eligible people who are unable to meet their mortgage interest repayments in respect of a house which is their sole place of residence. The supplement assists with the interest portion of the mortgage repayments only.
One of the statutory conditions for receipt of mortgage interest supplement is that, in the opinion of the HSE, the person must have been in a position, at the time the loan agreement was entered into, to meet the repayments under that agreement (Article 10(1)(b)(i) of the Social Welfare (Consolidated Supplementary Welfare Allowance) Regulations 2007).
Accordingly, in determining entitlement to mortgage interest supplement, a community welfare officer may examine the original loan application, supporting documentation and records of repayments in order to assess the capacity of the person to make a long-term commitment to repayment of the loan in question.
It is a matter for the community welfare officer to a make a decision on entitlement based on all of the facts of the case. There is a right of appeal against the decision of the community welfare officer to a Health Service Executive Appeals Officer and thereafter to the Chief Appeals Officer of the Department.
The supplement is normally calculated to ensure that a person, after the payment of mortgage interest, has an income equal to the rate of supplementary welfare allowance, appropriate to their family circumstances, less a minimum contribution which recipients are required to pay from their own resources.
The existing mortgage interest supplement assessment provides for a gradual withdrawal of payment as hours of employment or earnings increase. In recent years improvements have [615]been made to the means test to encourage eligible people to engage in employment without losing their entire mortgage interest supplement.
Those availing of part-time employment and/or training opportunities can continue to receive mortgage interest supplement subject to their satisfying the standard means assessment rules. Since June 2007, where a person has additional income in excess of the standard weekly rate of supplementary welfare allowance, the first €75 of such additional income together with 25% of any additional income above €75 is disregarded for means assessment purposes. This ensures that those returning to work or participating in training schemes are better off as a result of taking up such an opportunity.
Mortgage interest supplement recipients are required to make a minimum contribution towards the cost of their accommodation costs. When last set in 2004, the contribution represented approximately 10% of the minimum social welfare weekly payment rate. While basic social welfare rates of payment have risen by nearly €70 per week since then, no upward adjustment has been made to the minimum contribution. As part of Budget 2009 measures, I announced my intention to increase the minimum contribution from €13 to €18 with effect from 1 January 2009. This contribution which represents 8.8% of the basic social welfare weekly payment is significantly less than the minimum rent paid by many local authority tenants.
There are currently 6,900 people in receipt of mortgage interest supplement, a 68% increase on the numbers receiving the supplement at the end of December 2007.
The mortgage interest supplement schemes provide an adequate short-term “safety net” within the overall social welfare system to ensure that people do not suffer hardship due to loss of employment. I do not consider that any further changes in eligibility criteria are required at this time. However the scheme will be kept under review to ensure that it meets the objective of catering for those who require assistance on a short-term basis.
108. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for a State transition pension, contributory State pension and a non-contributory State pension being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39449/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Entitlement to a State Pension (Transition) or State Pension (Contributory) is based on a person’s social insurance record. The pensions are payable at age 65 and 66 respectively, subject to satisfying the qualifying conditions. State Pension (Non-Contributory) is a means tested pension, payable to people aged 66 or over, subject to satisfying the qualifying conditions.
The numbers of people in receipt of the each pension over the past three years are as follows:
| At end of October | State Pension (Transition) | State Pension (Contributory) | State Pension (Non-Contributory) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 92,559* | 137,907 | 97,404 |
| 2007 | 5,687 | 235,653 | 97,726 |
| 2008 | 7,261 | 248,484 | 97,820 |
109. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the changes she will make to the way the household benefits package to allow for the equitable treatment of people with oil fired central heating. [39552/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The household benefits package is generally available to people living in the State, aged 66 years or over who are in receipt of a social welfare type payment or who satisfy a means test. It is also available to people aged under 66 who are in receipt of certain disability payments or carer’s allowance. The package includes the electricity and gas allowance, telephone allowance and free television licence schemes. There are currently 355,000 people in receipt of household benefits at an annual cost of €317 million.
The electricity allowance element of the household benefits package is paid as a credit on the person’s electricity bill. The natural gas allowance is an alternative to the electricity allowance for people whose homes are connected to a natural gas supply. People can choose to have the allowance applied to either their electricity or their gas bill, whichever is most beneficial to them.
There are no plans at present to amend the household benefits to include an allowance for oil based heating. However, I will continue to review the operation of the scheme with a view to identifying the scope for further improvements as resources permit.
110. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the most recent figures for the number of recipients and the cost to the Exchequer, of mortgage payment assistance; the budgeted Exchequer expenditure on mortgage payment assistance for each of the years 2008, 2009 and 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [38825/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The supplementary welfare allowance scheme, which is administered by the community welfare service of the Health Service Executive on behalf of the Department, provides for a weekly or monthly supplement to be paid in respect of mortgage interest. The purpose of the mortgage interest supplement is to provide short term income support to eligible people who are unable to meet their mortgage interest repayments in respect of a house which is their sole place of residence. The supplement assists with the interest portion of the mortgage repayments only.
There are currently 6,930 people in receipt of mortgage interest supplement, a 69% increase on the numbers receiving the supplement at the end of December 2007.
The published estimate of expenditure for mortgage interest supplement for 2008 is €14.4million, an increase of €2.2million on the 2007 expenditure. The current estimated cost of the mortgage interest supplement scheme for 2008 is €25.6million.
In the current economic climate and with falling interest rates, it is difficult to estimate expenditure into the future. The provisional estimate for 2009 is €29.6m. Expenditure on mortgage interest supplement is closely monitored on a monthly basis in the context of the Government’s framework for reporting on public expenditure and estimates of future expenditure will be revised as appropriate. Estimated expenditure for 2010 will be formulated in the context of the 2010 Budget and taking into account trends in recipient numbers, average monthly mortgage interest payments and expenditure trends in 2009.
111. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the progress that has been made in the development of a second tier payment for children in low income families and in the introduction of a single payment for all parents, either living alone or with a partner, with children on a low income as contained in Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39567/08]
153. Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the outcome of her deliberations in respect of the proposed introduction of a new family payment to support children in low income families. [39559/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 111 and 153 together.
The Government discussion paper, “Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents,” put forward proposals to tackle obstacles to employment for lone parents and other low income families. These included proposals for the expanded availability and range of education and training opportunities for lone parents; the extension of the National Employment Action Plan to focus on lone parents; focused provision of childcare; improved information services for lone parents and the introduction of a new social assistance payment for low income families with young children.
Under the proposals the lone parenthood category of payment would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents (living alone or with a partner), with young children, on low income. This new payment is currently being developed in the Department, taking into account the various issues raised in the consultation process.
Any proposed new payment scheme can only be introduced when the necessary co-ordinated supports and services are put in place on the ground by other relevant Departments and Agencies. This is why the Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion has been tasked with bringing forward a plan on the key issues of childcare, education, training and activation measures.
The non-income recommendations contained in the discussion paper were examined in two areas: Coolock and Kilkenny. These studies, which took place between November 2007 and February 2008, were carried out to facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme. The process involved both lone parents and qualified adults. It was carried out on a voluntary basis and the take-up was low.
The experience has however highlighted how both lone parents and qualified adults are not a homogenous group, are of different ages, have experienced different routes into their current situation and have different needs. Educational levels of those who participated were generally low, there was little or no engagement with FÁS, some participants intended to return to full or part-time work when their child was a few months old; others, however, had been out of the work force for a considerable period of time. Earnings from previous employment were generally low. For almost all of those intending to return to work affordable childcare was a critical issue.
The experience of this engagement process is feeding into the development of our approach to working with lone parents and qualified adults to support them into education, training and employment.
The Programme for Government 2007 — 2012 proposes that Qualified Child Increases (QCI) and Family Income Supplements (FIS) would be amalgamated in order to develop a second tier of income support targeted at the poorest families. Under the terms of an earlier Social Partnership Agreement, the National Economic and Social Council was asked to examine the [618]feasibility of merging these payments with a view to creating a single second tier child income support. Dr. John Sweeney of NESC examined the issues and developed proposals for a second tier child income support scheme but NESC did not reach agreement on the matter. Dr Sweeney’s proposal was published as a research paper towards the end of 2007. However, this proposal raised a number of significant issues which would require a further detailed examination by the Department and by other agencies.
The Economic and Social Research Institute has also undertaken recent research in this area and concluded, inter alia, that full take-up of the Family Income Supplement scheme would reduce child income poverty by 3%. Arising from this research, the Department undertook to determine the current level of take up of FIS among qualifying families and to ascertain the reasons underlying the failure to avail of this payment, where applicable; and carry out an analysis of the existing FIS customer base. This research is now nearing completion.
In considering the future direction of child income support policy, it is important to keep in mind the multiple objectives behind the provision of such support and the research undertaken by Dr. Sweeney, the ESRI and the Department will inform future policy developments in this area.
112. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the proposals she has made to Government to merge the employment services section of FÁS with her Department. [39512/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I have not made any proposals to Government to merge the employment support services of FÁS with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. FÁS and the Department work together in a complementary way on behalf of people on social welfare payments.
Both sides operate under a memorandum of understanding which is updated periodically. Senior officials of the Department hold regular joint meetings with FÁS and the Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment. There are also regular meetings between officials of the Department and FÁS at regional and local level. A high degree of cooperation and coordination exists at both policy and operational level between the Department of Social and Family Affairs and FÁS.
An important area of this cooperation is in relation to the joint National Employment Action Plan whereby people are referred to FÁS when they reach 3 months on the live register.
The Department works closely with FÁS in providing opportunities for people on social welfare to access the range of training and employment services afforded by that organisation.
I am satisfied that the existing arrangements with FÁS, together with the supporting activation measures undertaken by the Department, ensure that the social and economic progression of those most marginalised is being adequately addressed.
113. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the changes she will make to the way fuel allowance is paid; and her views on paying it in two lumps sums to people with oil fired central heating, should that be their wish, to ease the burden of large infrequent or once off costs. [39551/08]
[619]136. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the checks conducted by her Department to assess the adequacy of fuel allowance in meeting the fuel costs of people on low incomes. [39510/08]
160. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason the fuel allowance is not paid in two block sums, as lobbied for by many poverty and other agencies. [39485/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 113, 136 and 160 together.
The household benefits package is generally available to people living in the State, aged 66 years or over who are in receipt of a social welfare type payment or who satisfy a means test. It is also available to people aged under 66 who are in receipt of certain disability social welfare payments or carer’s allowance. The package includes the electricity and gas allowance, telephone allowance and free television licence schemes.
Some 358,000 pensioner and other households qualify for electricity and gas allowances through the household benefits package.
These allowances help with heating, light and cooking costs throughout the year. The electricity allowance element of the household benefits package is paid as a credit on the person’s electricity bill. The natural gas allowance is an alternative to the electricity allowance for people whose homes are connected to a natural gas supply. People can choose to have the allowance applied to either their electricity or their gas bill, whichever is most beneficial to them.
In recent years there have been significant improvements to the value of these allowances. In January 2007 the number of units covered by the electricity allowance was increased from 1,200 to 2,400 units. A corresponding increase in the value of the gas allowance had been implemented in the previous October.
From 1 August 2008 the value of the electricity allowance per household increased from €465 to €540 per annum in line with electricity price increases, based on urban rates. In order to continue to maintain the value of the electricity and gas allowances at the same level, the value of the gas allowance was also increased to €540 per annum from the same date. I increased the value of the allowances in order to match recent price increases to ensure that customers continue to receive the same amount of energy under the household benefit scheme.
This represents increased expenditure on these schemes of some €11 million for the remainder of the year bringing the total expenditure on the schemes to approximately €170 million this year.
The national fuel allowance scheme also provides assistance to householders on long term social welfare or health service executive payments with meeting the cost of their heating needs during the winter season. The allowance represents a contribution towards a person’s normal heating expenses. It is not intended to meet those costs in full.
In Budget 2009 I was pleased to be able to increase the value of the fuel allowance by €2 per week to €20 per week from January 2009 with an additional €3.90 per week paid to those in smokeless fuel areas.
In addition, I was happy to extend the duration of the scheme by two weeks so that the fuel allowance will now be paid for 32 weeks a year.
Fuel allowances are incorporated in the recipient’s weekly social welfare payment. This reflects the objective that the total weekly income of benefit and assistance recipients, including the fuel allowance, is sufficient to meet all of their income needs, including heating costs.
[620]It is estimated that almost 300,000 people will benefit under the scheme in 2008 at a cost over €170 million.
As with all schemes, I will be keeping the household benefits and fuel allowance schemes under review to ensure that they continue to meet their objectives.
Question No. 114 answered with Question No. 102.
115. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the steps taken by her on the issue of older people living below the poverty line; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39406/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The needs of older people have been a priority for this Government for many years. Under this policy the rate of the contributory pension has increased from €147.30 per week in 2002 to more than €230 per week from next January, with the non-contributory pension increasing from €134.00 per week to €219 per week over the same period. In addition to increasing personal rates of pension, considerable progress has also been made in improving payments for qualified adults and enhancing the household benefits package and other supports available to older people.
The results of this policy can be seen in the fact that a number of older people living in consistent poverty fell from 3.7% in 2005 to 2.1% in 2006, thereby meeting the target set in the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion. Furthermore, the consistent poverty rate for people aged 65 and over was significantly lower than the position for the general population where the rate was 6.9%.
These figures do not take account of the significant increases in pensions since 2006 so the position can be expected to improve further. In Budget 2009 we have provided for increases of €7 per week in the personal rate of pensions. This is broadly in line with inflation and so will maintain the real value of pension payments and protect the very significant progress we have made in recent years in reducing the poverty risk for all our older people.
116. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the action she is taking to augment staffing levels in her Department to deal with the increased demand from the growing number of new entrants onto the live register. [39554/08]
120. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the steps she is taking to ensure that her Department is meeting the extra demand placed on its services as a result of rising unemployment. [39500/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 116 and 120 together.
The Department delivers a front-line service through a network of 61 Local Offices and 64 Branch Offices countrywide. The main services provided from these offices include jobseeker’s payment, one-parent family payment and an information service.
The Department has put a range of measures in place to deal with the extra workload arising from the increase in the Live Register. These include:
use of temporary staff to fill vacancies pending the appointment of permanent staff;
[621]extension of temporary staff contracts in certain offices;
These measures are being reviewed on a continuous basis.
Following on a recent review of the staffing levels in Local Offices an additional 115 staff are to be assigned to some 48 offices.
In the past few years the Department has coped with increasing demands arising from significant changes to the social welfare code and in the numbers of persons accessing services. Operational procedures and the organisation of work continue to be reviewed and restructured to maximise the benefits of technology and new developments in processing techniques and business information.
117. Deputy Noel J. Coonan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will develop and publish a national strategy to address fuel poverty; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39393/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I share Deputies’ concerns about the impact of rising fuel and energy costs. My own priority, as Minister for Social and Family Affairs, is to ensure that Government assistance is available to those who need our help the most, older people, those with disabilities or serious illnesses, and people on low incomes.
Government policy in recent years, has focused on increasing primary social welfare rates significantly to ensure that people on social welfare can meet their basic living costs, including heating costs throughout the year.
Since December 2001, overall inflation has increased by 28% while energy product prices have increased by 74%. However, increases in social welfare payments have been between 71% and 88% in the same period. These payments are intended to cover general basic living costs, including some heating costs. In addition, the fuel allowance is paid to almost 300,000 people, while 357,000 receive electricity or gas allowances, at a combined cost of approximately €340 million.
Significant improvements have been made to both schemes in recent years:
The value of the fuel allowance has been doubled since 2005 to €18 per week or € 21.90 for recipients living in designated smokeless areas;
The number of weeks for which the fuel allowance is paid has been extended to 30; and
In January 2007 the number of units covered by the electricity allowance was increased from 1,800 to 2,400.
In August 2008 the value of the electricity and gas allowances under the household benefits package increased to €540 per annum and are payable throughout the year to over 357,000 pensioners, people with disabilities, and carer households towards their heating, light and cooking costs at an estimated overall scheme cost of €170m in 2008.
In Budget 2009 I increased the fuel allowance by a further €2 per week and extended the season by 2 weeks to 32 weeks. These improvements will bring the annual cost of the scheme to €205m. The Budget also provided for further increases in basic social welfare payments next [622]year. The supplementary welfare allowance scheme can also be used to assist people, in certain circumstances, with specific heating needs due to infirmity or a particular medical condition.
Of course income support is only part of the answer in terms of reducing fuel poverty. Proper household insulation is absolutely vital. Initiatives such as the Warmer Homes Scheme, operated by Sustainable Energy Ireland, under the aegis of the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources have a very valuable role to play in that regard, as does funding from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to improve the quality of existing local authority housing.
Coordination of the work of the relevant departments and agencies is crucial to ensuring the effective delivery of a comprehensive approach to tackling fuel poverty. While various bodies have significantly increased the resources they are directing at fuel poverty initiatives in recent years, the establishment of an inter-departmental group on energy affordability has helped to ensure that we are working closer together to maximise the potential of our collective efforts. The Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has overarching responsibility for the energy portfolio. It has recently convened this inter-Departmental/Agency Group on Affordable Energy, co-chaired with the Office for Social Inclusion of the Department of Social and Family Affairs, to coordinate and drive Government policy in this area. The Group includes officials of the departments of the Taoiseach, Finance, Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Health and Children, the Commission for Energy Regulation, Sustainable Energy Ireland, the ESB and Bord Gais. The objective is to ensure shared understanding of the challenges and actions underway and to ensure a fully cohesive strategic approach to delivery of affordable energy initiatives and programmes.
The Group will report to the Cabinet Committee on Social Inclusion, Children and Integration and the Cabinet Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security Infrastructure.
118. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the measures she will take in the next 12 months to increase the take-up of family income supplement. [39488/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The family income supplement scheme (FIS), which provides income support for employees on low earnings with families, is designed to preserve the incentive to move from welfare to (or remain in) employment in circumstances where the employee might only be marginally better off than if he or she were claiming other social welfare payments.
Since its introduction concern has been expressed from a number of quarters that there is a low take-up under the scheme. It has not been possible to estimate from administrative sources the number of families who would be eligible but do not apply for their FIS entitlements. However, research undertaken by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) in 1997, which was based on the results of the Living in Ireland Survey 1994, suggested that fewer than one in three of potentially eligible claimants were actually in receipt of the payment at that time. Since those with a higher entitlement are more likely to avail of the scheme, the take-up in expenditure terms was estimated to be somewhat higher, at close to 40% of potential expenditure. Subsequent studies by the ESRI have arrived at similar estimates of take-up.
The Department undertook a nationwide awareness campaign in March 2006 to promote and encourage increased take up of the scheme for working families on low incomes. This extensive campaign included advertising on TV, on national and local radio and in the national [623]and regional press. A nation-wide poster campaign was also undertaken. In addition, the FIS income thresholds were refocused in 2006 and 2007 to concentrate additional resources on larger families, with, for example, increases ranging from €9 for a one child family to €111 for a family with 8 or more children provided in 2007.
These measures have resulted in a substantial increase in take-up under the scheme, up by almost 50% from 17,450 at the end of 2005 to 26,300 at the end of October, 2008.
Specifically in the next 12 months, the Department will continue to undertake a range of measures to ensure that people are made aware of possible entitlement to FIS. These include the provision of advice to all people who are awarded a one parent family payment or a back to work allowance. Information on FIS is also published on the Department’s website and made available through the Citizen’s Information Service. The recent Budget also provides for an increase in the income limits for FIS by €10 a week in respect of each child, giving increases ranging from €6 to €48 per week depending on family size, from January 2009. It is estimated that approximately 2,000 additional families will become eligible for a FIS payment following these increases in the income thresholds, bringing the total number of families benefiting from FIS to over 29,000.
Following on from further research undertaken by the ESRI, the Department undertook to determine the current level of take up of FIS among qualifying families and to ascertain the reasons underlying the failure to avail of this payment, where applicable; and carry out an analysis of the existing FIS customer base. This research is now nearing completion and will further guide the Department on the best ways of promoting FIS and encouraging take-up into the future.
119. Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when the National Carers Strategy will be published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39374/08]
451. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when the National Carer’s Strategy, due for completion by the end of 2007, will be published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40026/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 119 and 451 together.
The development of a National Carers Strategy is a key Government commitment in both the national partnership agreement Towards 2016 and the Programme for Government.
A working group, chaired by the Department of An Taoiseach, is working on developing the strategy. My Department provides the secretariat to the working group which also includes representatives of the Departments of Finance, Health and Children and Enterprise, Trade and Employment as well as FÁS and the Health Service Executive. Developing the strategy involves consultation with other government departments and bodies not represented on the working group.
The Department has met with a wide range of organisations including the Equality Authority, Combat Poverty Agency, Citizen’s Information Board, the National Council on Ageing and Older People, the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the National Disability Authority to discuss this issue.
[624]A request for submissions from the public was published in regional newspapers in early March. The closing date for submissions was Friday 18 April 2008. There was a good response from individuals and organisations and the submissions received are being examined.
Towards 2016 commits the Department to hosting an annual consultation meeting of carer representative groups and relevant departments and agencies. Such a meeting was held on 23 January 2008. Representatives of 12 groups and 9 government departments and bodies attended. The theme was the National Carers Strategy and groups were given an opportunity to comment on the draft terms of reference and to raise other issues considered relevant in the context of the strategy.
I was very pleased to launch the report “Listening to Carers, Report on a Nationwide Carer Consultation” produced by the Carers Association in partnership with Caring for Carers Ireland and Care Alliance on 30th of June this year. The issues raised in this report are currently being considered as part of the development of the strategy.
The commitment to the development of a National Carers Strategy also includes a commitment to appropriate consultation with the social partners. An update in relation to the strategy was provided to the social partners plenary session in February. The first of two consultation meetings with the social partners was held on 8 May 2008. Key issues raised were recognition for carers and their work, access to suitable health services, income support, training, gender issues and balancing employment and care.
We are currently working on bringing the carers strategy to completion.
Question No. 120 answered with Question No. 116.
Question No. 121 answered with Question No. 96.
122. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for illness benefit being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39453/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I understand that the figures required by the Deputy relate to the number of Illness Benefit claims currently pending decision, the number currently in payment and comparative figures for 2006 and 2007. The figures are set out in the following table.
| Week Ending | Claims Pending Decision | Claims in Payment |
|---|---|---|
| Friday 20-Oct-2006 | 3,357 | 66,501 |
| Friday 19-Oct-2007 | 4,820 | 71,195 |
| Friday 24-Oct-2008 | 6,896 | 73,333 |
The significant expansion in the workforce over the last number of years has given an entitlement to Illness Benefit to an increasing number of people.
The number of Illness Benefit claims received in the period to October 2008 was 263,893. This was an increase of 10.6% and 4.3% on the respective periods in 2006 and 2007. Notwithstanding this increase, the average time taken to process an Illness Benefit claim so far this year is 7.5 days.
[625]If a person applies for Illness Benefit and cannot meet their financial needs while they are awaiting a decision on their claim they can apply for Supplementary Welfare Allowance (SWA). However, the Department prioritises claims from persons who have no other income and, in general, these are cleared within three days. Because of this, recourse to SWA is very low.
123. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on altering the eligibility criteria for the household benefits package in relation to medical grounds; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39460/08]
147. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on altering, in particular on medical grounds, the eligibility criteria for free travel; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39461/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 123 and 147 together.
The free travel and household benefits package are generally available to people living in the State, aged 66 years or over, who are in receipt of a social welfare type payment or who satisfy a means test. It is also available to people aged under 66 who are in receipt of certain disability payments or carer’s allowance. The household benefit package includes the electricity and gas allowance, telephone allowance and free television licence schemes.
I have no plans to extend the criteria for the household benefits and free travel schemes to include medical grounds, irrespective of income.
124. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for invalidity pension being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39454/08]
139. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for carer’s allowance and benefit being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39456/08]
142. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for family income supplement being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39452/08]
144. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for disability allowance being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39455/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 124, 139, 142 and 144 together.
The following table outlines the numbers of claims decided, for each of the schemes concerned, in the first 10 months of 2006, 2007 and 2008:
125. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will report on the welfare reforms for child income supports that were outlined in the programme for Government; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39427/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Programme for Government 2007-2012 commits to:
Amalgamating increases for qualified children (IQCs) and family income supplement (FIS) in order to develop a second tier of income support targeted at the poorest families;
Continuing to increase child benefit; and
Implementing significant improvements to the back to school clothing and footwear allowance and school meals programme.
The National Economic and Social Council was asked to examine the feasibility of merging IQCs and FIS with a view to creating a single second tier child income support. Dr. John Sweeney was commissioned by NESC to examine the issues and develop proposals for a second tier child income support scheme. NESC did not reach agreement on his report which was subsequently published as a research paper.
His research paper on this issue was received towards the end of 2007 and its main proposal was the abolition of the current FIS and IQC payments and the introduction of a means-based, employment-neutral child income support payment. However, his proposals raise a number of significant issues which require further detailed examination by the Department of Social and Family Affairs and other agencies.
The Economic and Social Research Institute has also undertaken recent research in this area and concluded, inter alia, that full take-up of FIS would reduce child income poverty by 3%.
Arising from this research, the Department undertook to determine the current level of take up of FIS among qualifying families and to ascertain the reasons underlying the failure to avail of this payment, where applicable; and carry out an analysis of the existing FIS customer base. This research is now nearing completion.
In considering the future direction of child income support policy, it is important to keep in mind the multiple objectives behind the provision of such support and the research undertaken by Dr. Sweeney, the ESRI and the Department will inform future policy developments in this area.
[627]In relation to child benefit, the rates of payment have been increased by between 185% and 200% in the period from 2001 to 2008, while total expenditure on the scheme has increased by almost 300% during the same period. In the context of the current economic circumstances, Budget 2009 does not provide for an increase in the rates of child benefit.
126. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the claims from the pension industry that the regulatory regime is putting pressure on the sustainability of defined benefit pension schemes. [39553/08]
159. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the assessment she has undertaken of the risk to defined benefit pension schemes of the actuarial funding standard; the discussions she has had with affected employers and employees; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39558/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 126 and 159 together.
The Pensions Act provides for a Funding Standard which must be met on an ongoing basis by all defined benefit pension schemes. The Funding Standard requires that schemes maintain sufficient assets to enable them to discharge accrued liabilities in the event of a scheme winding up. Where schemes do not satisfy the Funding Standard the sponsors/trustees must submit a funding proposal to the Pensions Board to restore full funding.
In 2007, 81% of defined benefit schemes reporting to the Pensions Board passed the Funding Standard, with most of the balance having a funding proposal in place to restore full funding.
I have previously acknowledged that pension funds will have suffered losses in the last year or so while factors such as increased life expectancy have also led to increased liabilities. Accordingly, it is to be expected that the number of schemes failing the funding standard will increase, but the extent of the problem will not be fully apparent until schemes carry out end of scheme year actuarial assessments and report the results to the Pensions Board.
The overall operation of the Funding Standard is discussed in the Green Paper on pensions and any changes proposed will be announced in the context of the framework for pensions which the Government has indicated it will announce by the end of the year.
These will also take account of the wide range of submissions received from both representative organisations and members of the public made during the formal consultation process. My officials have met with a number of groups to explore their submissions in more detail. Unfortunately, while everyone acknowledges the need for pension reform, no consensus has emerged from the consultation process on the nature of the reforms required.
There is no doubt that the current situation is causing difficulties for defined benefit pension schemes and my Department is working with the Pensions Board and representative organisations to find ways to ease the pressure on schemes. Indeed, given current market conditions and the difficulties these pose for schemes in trying to devise their funding plans, I recently asked the Pensions Board to allow additional time for the preparation of funding proposals, as a temporary measure.
This should provide schemes with sufficient time to deal with the issues in an orderly manner. In addition to this, the Pensions Board are continuing to consider the issues involved for schemes who are experiencing difficulties in returning to a fully-funded position.
[628]However, in considering any amendments to the funding standard there is a very difficult balance to be struck between the long-term nature of pension savings and the need to ensure, as far as we can, the short-term security of the benefits already accrued by employees in a scheme.
127. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she has issued instructions throughout her Department to introduce economies, notwithstanding the public perception that no financial cutbacks are applicable to her Department arising from budget 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39569/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): While the 2009 Estimates for the Department published on 14th October show a substantial increase over the 2008 estimates, they also include some measures to reduce expenditure. These measures have been kept to the absolute minimum and applied in a careful manner. In addition, the administrative budget provision for 2009 has been reduced by €4.3m.
The Department is committed to achieving economy, efficiency and effectiveness in all its activities. In framing the estimates requirement for 2009, every effort was made to ensure that economies were achieved wherever possible and the situation will be kept under review during the course of the year.
128. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason for her decision not to increase the maximum rents allowed under rent supplement following the recent review. [39511/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Rent supplement is administered on behalf of the Department by the Health Service Executive as part of the supplementary welfare allowance scheme.
Rent supplement is subject to a limit on the amount of rent that a person may incur. Rent limits are set at levels that enable the different eligible household types to secure and retain basic suitable rented accommodation, having regard to the different rental market conditions that prevail in various parts of the State. The objective is to ensure that rent supplement is not paid in respect of overly expensive accommodation having regard to the size of the household.
Setting maximum rent limits higher than are justified by the open market would have a distorting effect on the rental market, leading to a more general rise in rent levels. This in turn would worsen, unnecessarily, the affordability of rental accommodation with particular negative impact for those tenants on lower incomes.
A review of rent limits was undertaken earlier this year. The review was informed by analysis of data sourced from the Private Residential Tenancies Board, the Central Statistics Office (CSO), the Community Welfare Service and by the views of statutory and voluntary agencies working in this area, including the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Data provided by the CSO indicates that the increase in private rent levels began to decelerate at the beginning of 2008 and rent levels declined by almost 5% by August of this year. This deceleration in rent levels is also reflected in the Daft.ie rental reports where a decrease of over 5% was reported in the first half of 2008. It is also reported that the supply of available rental accommodation has more than doubled in the last year.
[629]Given the current downward trend in private rent levels and the fact that the overall housing market is currently in a period of adjustment, increasing rent limits in the rent supplement scheme would send an inappropriate signal to the market where a third or so of private sector tenants receive rent supplement. In these circumstances, it was decided to retain rent limits at their current levels.
There is no hard evidence at this time that the prescribed upper limits on rent levels supported under the rent supplement scheme are having a detrimental impact on the ability of eligible tenants generally to secure suitable rented accommodation to meet their needs. There are currently over 69,500 rent supplements in payment. Almost 50,000 rent supplements have been awarded since January 2008. This suggests that the rent limits are set at reasonable levels at present.
Rent levels will continue to be monitored particularly for households that may find it difficult to secure or retain accommodation within the limits in certain areas. The position will be reviewed in 2009 when the results of the latest Private Rented Index report published by the CSO will be analysed for impact on rent limits.
The Health Service Executive has flexibility to award rent supplement above or below rent limits, having regard to local rent levels or to meet the particular needs of an individual. These discretionary powers ensure that individuals with particular needs can be accommodated within the scheme and specifically protects against homelessness.
129. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of people in receipt of jobseeker’s benefit affected by the budget 2009 announcement in relation to the changes to the maximum duration of their payments; and the steps taken to notify these claimants of the change in their entitlement. [39505/08]
448. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of people in receipt of jobseeker’s benefit affected by the budget 2009 announcement in relation to the changes to the maximum duration of their payments; and the steps taken to notify these claimants of the change in their entitlement. [39947/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 129 and 448 together.
Following changes announced in budget 2009 in relation to the length of time for which jobseeker’s benefit will be paid, it is envisaged that in 2009 a weekly average of 2,400 people will be affected by the reduction in duration from 312 days to 234 days and 3,860 people in a full year. A weekly average of 6,750 people will be affected by the reduction in duration from 390 days to 312 days and 9,200 people in a full year. Those affected who are without means may be entitled to a means tested jobseeker’s allowance or a supplementary welfare allowance at the same weekly payment rate.
Customers are normally advised 3 months in advance of exhausting their jobseeker’s benefit claim. This is to allow sufficient time to undertake a means test where a person wishes to apply for jobseeker’s allowance. At this stage those with less than 260 paid contributions and therefore entitled to 234 days of jobseeker’s benefit will be reviewed. Some of these may have additional contribution paid during 2008 which would not yet be reflected in the overall total contributions recorded in the Department. Others may have contributions paid in another EU country which could bring their total contributions to 260 or more. Any additional contributions may lead to an increased entitlement from 234 to 312 days duration.
130. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the outcome of the pilot studies in relation to support services and activation measures for lone parents. [39514/08]
149. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 contains no provision to end the cohabitation ban for lone parents in receipt of one parent family payment. [39516/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 130 and 149 together.
The Government discussion paper, “Proposals for Supporting Lone Parents,” put forward proposals to tackle obstacles to employment for lone parents and other low income families.
Under the proposals the lone parenthood category of payment would no longer exist. Instead, a new payment would be made to all parents (living alone or with a partner), with young children, on low income.
Any proposed new payment cannot be introduced without co-ordinated supports and services being put in place by other Departments and Agencies. The Senior Officials Group on Social Inclusion is working on an implementation plan to progress the non-income recommendations. Issues including access to childcare support, education, training and activation measures are being discussed with the relevant Departments and Agencies in tandem with the development of a new payment scheme.
To further inform the process, the Department, with the co-operation of FAS, the Office of the Minister for Children and the Department of Education and Science, tested the proposals in both an urban and rural setting: Coolock, Dublin and Kilkenny. These studies, which took place between November 2007 and February 2008, were carried out to facilitate the development of the policy and operational details of the new scheme. The process involved both lone parents and qualified adults. It was carried out on a voluntary basis and the take-up was low.
The experience has however highlighted how both lone parents and qualified adults are not a homogenous group, are of different ages, have experienced different routes into their current situation and have different needs. Educational levels of those who participated were generally low, there was little or no engagement with FÁS, some participants intended to return to full or part-time work when their child was a few months old; others, however, had been out of the work force for a considerable period of time. Earnings from previous employment were generally low. In Kilkenny access to transport was an issue with regard to taking up employment or training, with those outside the city of Kilkenny having problems in this regard. For almost all of those intending to return to work, affordable childcare is a critical issue.
Officials in the Department continue to work on developing the proposed new income support payment and the experience of this engagement process is feeding into the development of our approach to working with lone parents and qualified adults to support them into education, training and employment.
131. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for child benefit being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39451/08]
[631]Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The number of Child Benefit claims processed in 2008 to date and corresponding figures for 2007 and 2006 are detailed in the following table.
| Year to October | Total received | Total processed |
|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 70,834 | 73,185 |
| 2007 | 76,756 | 74,887 |
| 2008 | 79,901 | 86,140 |
In addition to these claims, a further 84,000 claims for the extension of payment for children over 16 years of age were also processed in the first 10 months of 2008.
132. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her future intentions in relation to the age thresholds for disability allowance. [39501/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The question of the age thresholds which apply to Disability Allowance is one of a wide range of issues now being addressed in the context of a comprehensive review of the scheme which is being undertaken by the Department.
This review is assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the Disability Allowance scheme. It draws on new data being made available by the Central Statistics Office from the National Disability Survey 2006. Account will also be taken of a forthcoming report on disability and illness benefits which is being published later this month by the OECD. And, of course, the review is also taking account of the wide range of issues identified by groups representing people with disabilities and by service providers in the disability sector.
I look forward to seeing the outcome of this review which it is expected will be completed in the first half of 2009.
133. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the discussions she has had with teachers, home school liaison officers or any personnel working at the coalface of education services in relation to the expected impact on participation rates in education among 18 year olds in poorer neighbourhoods as a result of her decision to end child benefit payments in respect of 18 year olds from 2010. [39502/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Significant improvements in child benefit have been made in recent years. For example, the rates of payment have been increased by between 185% and 200% in the period from 2001 to 2008, while total expenditure on the scheme has increased by almost 300% during the same period. However, in the context of the current economic circumstances it has been necessary for the Government to take a number of steps to reduce overall public expenditure in order to restore order and stability in the public finances.
In this regard, the Government has decided to limit overall expenditure on the child benefit scheme, which is paid regardless of means, by lowering the upper age limit that currently applies from 19 years to 18 years. The impact of this measure is being phased in, with payment for existing and future qualifying children being halved from January 2009 and payment stopping from the 18th birthday from January 2010.
[632]The vast majority of leaving certificate students will not be affected by this change, as over 70% are under the age of 18 years when they sit their leaving cert exams.
It is recognised that any changes in child benefit entitlements may have implications for family budgets. Accordingly, in order to protect the more vulnerable in society, special alleviating measures are being introduced for those in low income and social welfare dependent households. A compensatory payment of €15 is being provided during 2009 and 2010 for any week during which those affected by this measure are receiving a social welfare payment which includes an increase in respect of the 18 year old child or a family income supplement payment which includes payment in respect of that child. The compensatory payment will also apply where the child in question is receiving a disability allowance payment in his/her own right. In addition, households affected by the measure who also qualify for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance will receive an extra payment of €215, bringing the total payment in respect of such a child to €520. These transitional measures will cease in January 2011.
In the context of the current economic difficulties, the cabinet framing the budget had to take very difficult decisions. However, I am convinced that the expenditure control measures in the social welfare area have been kept to an absolute minimum and that the more vulnerable in society have been protected from their effects.
134. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the rationale behind changing the PRSI qualification for jobseeker’s benefit from the standard 52 weeks to 104 weeks. [39483/08]
137. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs his views on whether the new PRSI requirements for jobseeker’s benefit unfairly penalises young people who may have lost their first jobs due to the economic downturn. [39484/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 134 and 137 together.
In order to qualify for a social insurance payment, a person must fulfil all of the relevant conditions including the social insurance contribution conditions relating to the particular benefit being claimed. These contribution rules aim to preserve a balance between the level of contributions paid and the amount of benefits received, by ensuring that the claimants’ record of contributions is sufficient both in terms of initial establishment of a right to a benefit and of consistency of payment of contributions over the persons working life.
Where a person will be drawing more heavily on the resources of the Social Insurance Fund, e.g. where a person is claiming a benefit over a longer-term, it is considered appropriate that the tests should be more stringent. Accordingly, jobseeker’s benefit (JB) requires the claimant to have paid a minimum number of contributions since they first started working (currently 52) and also to demonstrate a recent attachment to the workforce by having a minimum number of contributions in a recent tax year. For long-term benefits, such as the state pension contributory, the person must have paid a more substantial minimum number of contributions (currently 260) and must also have a prescribed yearly average over their working lives.
For the past eleven years, the Social Insurance Fund has been in surplus, with more than sufficient income to the fund to cover the payments being made from it each year, without the State having to provide a subsidy. However, that is changing. As a result of further increases in the live register, expenditure is expected to exceed income to the Fund by over €200 million this year and about €900 million next year.
[633]In that context, it is appropriate to look at some of the instances where people with a very limited or distant contribution record have been able to qualify for very significant benefits, regardless of their household income.
Currently, people who have paid just 52 contributions in total can qualify for jobseeker’’s benefit. This means that migrants or young workers who have only worked for a total of one year are entitled to claim jobseeker’s payments for 12 months, without having to satisfy a means test. This is being changed from next January, when the number of required paid contributions will be doubled to 104 for new claimants. This measure is designed to more closely align the contribution conditions for this benefit to the level and duration of the benefit being provided.
However, it should be noted that people who will be affected by these changes will be able to claim Jobseeker’s Allowance or Supplementary Welfare Allowance instead, if they have limited means. The maximum rate of these two schemes is paid at the same rate as JB.
135. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the adequacy of provision for pension liabilities in the private sector; and the policy options open to her. [38747/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Private sector pensions include occupational pension schemes; either defined benefit or defined contribution schemes, and personal pensions such as personal retirement savings accounts (PRSAs) and retired annuity contracts (RACs).
Defined benefit pension schemes are required to hold sufficient assets to discharge their liabilities in the event that the scheme is wound up. These reserves are defined by the minimum Funding Standard provided for in the Pensions Act 1990. To ensure that these funds are maintained on an ongoing basis, each scheme is required to carry out a full actuarial assessment of its funding position every three years and an interim assessment of its financial position must be included in the scheme annual report.
I am aware that pension funds will have been affected by the recent economic downturn. Institutions where the downturn results in a defined benefit scheme failing to meet the funding standard are required to put in place a funding proposal that will enable the scheme to recover and meet the standard within three years. The Pensions Board has the authority to extend this recovery period to ten years in certain circumstances and I know that the Board is working closely with all scheme administrators in this regard.
Although still benefiting from employer contributions towards their pensions, members of defined contribution schemes bear the investment risks associated with their scheme. Accordingly, the value of their fund can decrease when markets fall which will impact on the value of the pension a person can purchase on retirement. As members near retirement, many administrators switch their assets to more conservative investments to ensure they are shielded from the volatility of the market.
These investment risks also apply to those with personal pensions such as PRSAs and RACs. It is important to remember that pensions are a long term investment and many people with pensions will have an opportunity to reclaim recent losses and benefit from any future market gains.
Following on from the launch of the Green Paper on Pensions and the conclusion of the formal consultation process, discussions are now ongoing in relation to possible reforms to strengthen both public and private sector pension provision.
[634]Our objective is to ensure that we have in place a pensions system which will deliver an adequate retirement income for all while being able to withstand the cost pressures which will arise in the future, as the composition of our population changes, and the balance between those at work and those who are retired shifts dramatically. In deciding on reforms we must be aware that good pension provision entails significant costs for society as a whole, whether it is delivered through the State system or by personal contributions to private arrangements.
There is no doubt that the Government is faced with difficult decisions but my fellow Ministers and I are determined to bring this process to a conclusion by announcing a framework to address the pensions agenda for the longer-term.
Question No. 136 answered with Question No. 113.
Question No. 137 answered with Question No. 134.
138. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if it is intended to improve access to the back to education allowance having particular regard to the downturn in the economy and the necessity to enhance the retraining and education of the workforce; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39568/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The back to education allowance (BTEA) Scheme is designed to help those in receipt of a social welfare payment who have not worked for some time to improve their employability and job-readiness by acquiring educational qualifications. It is a recognition of the special difficulties which such persons can face when attempting to gain a foothold in the labour market.
The allowance is paid at a standard weekly rate equivalent to the maximum rate of the relevant social welfare payment that qualifies the applicant for participation in the scheme. It essentially replaces their existing social welfare income and in addition an annual €500 cost of education allowance is payable.
To qualify for participation an applicant must be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment and be at least 21 years of age prior to commencing an approved course of study. However, lone parents and persons in receipt of unemployment payments can qualify at 18 years of age provided they are out of formal education for at least 2 years.
In general, an applicant must be in receipt of a relevant Social Welfare payment for 6 months if pursuing a second level course or 12 months if pursuing a third level course. In addition, the qualifying period for access to the third level option has been reduced to 9 months for persons who are participating in the National Employment Action Plan (NEAP) process, where a FÁS Employment Services Officer recommends pursuance of a third level course of study as essential to the enhancement of the individual’s employment prospects. Also people who are awarded statutory redundancy may access the scheme immediately, provided an entitlement to a relevant social welfare payment is established prior to commencing an approved course of study. The requirement to be in receipt of a relevant social welfare payment for a minimum period has always been a feature of the BTEA scheme and is considered necessary to ensure that limited resources are directed at those most in need.
The current scheme has been subject to review and modification over the years to ensure it continues to support those people who are most distant from the labour market and whose need is greatest. I will continue to monitor the scheme but I believe that, overall, the back to [635]education allowance scheme continues to meet its objectives and ensures that limited resources are targeted at those who are most in need.
The number of participants on the BTEA scheme has increased in recent years, supported by a growth in expenditure on the scheme from €38 million in 2003 to a provision of €70.8 million this year.
Question No. 139 answered with Question No. 124.
140. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will report on the welfare reforms outlined in the programme for Government for family supports; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39422/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Programme for Government contains two commitments in relation to family supports. These are:
Continue to fully resource the Family Support Agency and its programmes of Counselling, Family Resource Centres, etc. and
Continue to support community groups, and other appropriate family support structures to promote better parenting.
The Family Support Agency’s (FSA) budget for 2008 amounts to more than €36 million. This is up from some €28 million in 2006 and €35 million in 2007.
The FSA is responsible for a scheme of grants to voluntary organisations providing a range of family counselling and related matters. Over €9.9m was allocated in 2007 and some 553 organisations nationwide benefited from the scheme. In 2008, over €11m has been granted to 600 voluntary and community groups nationwide.
The FSA is also responsible for the Family and Community Services Resource Centre Programme (FRC programme). The aim of a Family Resource Centre is essentially to help combat disadvantage by supporting the functioning of the family unit. The emphasis in the projects is on the involvement of local communities in developing approaches to tackle the problems they face and on creating successful partnerships between the voluntary and statutory agencies in the area concerned.
The services provided and activities supported by the resource centres are designed to meet the needs of the local community. They include the provision of parenting courses, education and training opportunities for parents and active dissemination of information on a range of issues affecting families and local communities. By the end of 2008, the number of FRCs will have expanded from an original 10 to 107 nationwide. The FSA also runs 16 family mediation service offices across the country.
In 2007 the Family Support Agency launched a ‘Parenting Positively’ series of booklets jointly produced by the Agency and Barnardos. The series of nine free booklets provide information and guidance to parents of children between the ages of six and 12 years and cover general parenting skills as well as life issues such as separation, bullying, death and domestic abuse.
Budget 2009 also provided an extra €500,000 for the Family Support Agency to support programmes to promote positive parenting skills.
In January 2008, the Department amalgamated the Special Projects Fund and the Family Services Project into a new Activation and Family Supports programme (AFSP). Some €6m [636]has been made available to the AFSP for 2008 to support a small group of social welfare dependent customers with complex needs, including very young lone parents, other parents rearing children without the support of a partner and dependent spouses on social welfare payments. The programme is administered through the local Facilitator network based in the Social Welfare Local Offices. Examples of activities funded include, parenting projects for lone parents, family support for Travellers and support programmes for carers and families of people with disabilities.
141. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the way her Department has stress-tested the impact of each of the measures announced in budget 2009 on individual social welfare recipients and particular sub-groups; and if she is satisfied that the net effect of budget 2009 will not be an increase in poverty levels among certain groups. [39506/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The social welfare related measures in Budget 2009 were subjected to a Poverty Impact Assessment in accordance with guidelines issued by the Office for Social Inclusion in March of this year.
Poverty Impact Assessment is the process by which government departments, local authorities and State Agencies assess policies and programmes at design, implementation and review stages in relation to the likely impact that they will have, or have had, on poverty and on inequalities which are likely to lead to poverty, with a view to poverty reduction.
The ESRI’s SWITCH model was used to measure the impact of the proposed changes on actual household incomes. This analysis concluded the following:
The increase is progressive in terms of its distributional impact: 52% of the change in disposable income resulting from the social welfare Budget proposals will go to those in the bottom three deciles, while 79% will go to the bottom half of the income distribution; and
The proposals will result in a fall of 0.59 and 1.20 percentage points respectively in the numbers below 50% and 60% of median equivalised disposable income
Actual changes in both the ‘at risk of poverty’ and ‘consistent poverty’ rates during 2009 will not be known until the results of the EU-SILC survey for that year are available, which is likely to be around November 2010. A separate Poverty Impact Assessment on the taxation proposals in the Budget was undertaken by the Department of Finance.
Question No. 142 answered with Question No. 124.
143. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her views on the effectiveness of policies in relation to the take-up of supplementary pensions. [39557/08]
155. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the timetable she is working to in relation to a decision on future pensions policy. [39515/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 143 and 155 together.
[637]Supplementary pension coverage for workers in general was 54% in the first quarter of 2008 and, for the key target group, those aged 30 years and over it, stood at 61%.
Overall, the process was very successful with a wide range of submissions received from both representative organisations and members of the public.
All the submissions are available online at “http://www.pensionsgreenpaper.ie” www.pensionsgreenpaper.ie as is the report on the consultation process itself.
My Department has since met with a number of organisations to explore their submissions in more detail. Unfortunately, while everyone acknowledges the need for pension reform, no consensus has emerged from the consultation process on the nature of the reforms required.
Our objective must be to ensure that we have in place a pensions system which will deliver an adequate retirement income for all our people and which can, at the same time, withstand the cost pressures which will arise in the future as the composition of our population changes and the balance between those at work and those who are retired shifts dramatically.
Question No. 144 answered with Question No. 124.
145. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her plans in relation to the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion and in particular the high level goals in relation to welfare support for children. [39508/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Combating poverty and building an inclusive society are key priorities for the Government. The overall goal of the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion (NAPinclusion) introduced in February 2007 is to reduce the number of those experiencing consistent poverty to between 2 % and 4 % by 2012, with the aim of eliminating consistent poverty by 2016. These commitments and the social inclusion commitments in the National Development Plan have wide ranging support, having been drawn up in consultation with the social partners and other stakeholders.
One of the twelve high level goals, set out in the Plan, focuses on achieving significant real increases in income supports for children. Three others address education initiatives. In addition, 42 of the 150 detailed targets in the Plan cover services such as health, education, income support and early childhood development and care. These services directly tackle poverty in families and make a key contribution to helping children reach their true potential.
Significant progress has been achieved in reducing child poverty in Ireland over the past decade and, in spite of current economic difficulties, the Government is determined to continue this work. The recent Budget provided for a range of measures costing over €56 million to benefit children and families. These measures include, an increase of €2 in the qualified child increase payable with social welfare payments bringing the rate up to €26 per week from January 2009; an increase of €10 per week per child in all Family Income Supplement income thresholds giving an increase of up to €6 per child per week, from January 2009; and an increase of €50 per week in the income threshold for the back to school clothing and footwear scheme to enable more families qualify. These increases will mean that the high level goal of maintaining the combined value of child income support measures at 33% to 35% of the minimum adult social welfare payment rate will continue to be met next year. (These range between 33.4% and 43.7%).
In framing Budget 2009, the Government has prioritised delivering real increases in social welfare payments to ensure that, in line with the NAPinclusion, the most vulnerable groups in [638]our society are protected. Increases of between 3 % and 3.8 % in the basic payment rates have been provided for next year, ahead of the projected rate of inflation for 2009, which is 2.5%.
146. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the outcome of the review by her Department in relation to the equal treatment of men and women in the social welfare code; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39509/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The purpose of the review of the social welfare code, which is currently being undertaken in the Department, is to examine its compatibility with the Equal Status Act, 2000 (as amended). The review is examining all the schemes and services provided for both in social welfare legislation and the administrative schemes operated by the Department. It will identify any instances of direct or indirect discrimination, on any of the nine grounds (including gender) under the Act that are not justified by a legitimate social policy objective or where the means of achieving that objective are either unnecessary or inappropriate.
The review is being undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 involved undertaking a scoping exercise to establish the most appropriate approach and methodology to carrying out the main review, which would be robust and verifiable. The results of Phase 1 then formed the basis of the terms of reference of the main review. Consultants were selected to carry out the main review and work commenced in October 2007. The work is expected to be completed by early 2009.
Question No. 147 answered with Question No. 123.
148. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if, as suggested by recent media reports and as set out in the programme for Government, she considered removing the cap on PRSI on incomes of more than €52,000; if she remains committed to fundamental reform of PRSI; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [38827/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Under the PRSI system social insurance contributions are compulsorily payable by employers, employed and self-employed workers.
The employee PRSI ceiling is reviewed annually in accordance with the legislative stipulations of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 2005. The legislation requires that changes in the average earnings of workers, as recorded by the Central Statistics Office, be taken into account in this regard. In the 2009 Budget the employee ceiling was increased by €1,300 from €50,700 to €52,000, in line with projected increases in earnings for 2009.
The Department of Social and Family Affairs regularly examines the structure of the PRSI system, including issues relating to the ceiling. In this regard it may be noted that the Programme for Government commitments, which envisaged abolishing the PRSI ceiling and reducing the PRSI rate were predicated on an average growth rate of 4.5% per annum.
Any possible future changes to the PRSI ceiling and rates would have to be considered in a budgetary context.
Question No. 149 answered with Question No. 130.
150. Deputy John Perry asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for back to education allowance being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39458/08]
161. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for back to work allowance being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39457/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 150 and 161 together.
The back to work allowance scheme is designed to assist and encourage the long term unemployed, lone parents, people with disabilities and other social welfare recipients to return to the active labour force. These allowances provide a monetary incentive for people who are long term dependant on social welfare payments to make the return to work.
In the 43 weeks to the 24th October 2008, a total of 3,008 people qualified for the back to work allowance compared to 3,726 for the same period in 2007 and 3,838 in 2006. In relation to the numbers on the scheme, there were 8,584 people on the back to work allowance at the end of October 2006 and this increased to 9,010 at the end of October 2007. There has been a decrease in the past 12 months to 8,347 at the end of October 2008.
The back to education scheme is a second chance education opportunity designed to remove the barriers to participation in second and third level education. It encourages and facilitates people on certain social welfare payments to improve their skills and qualifications and, therefore, their prospects of returning to the active work force. The objective of the scheme is to enhance the employability skills of vulnerable groups who are distant from the labour market.
The statistics on participation in the back to education scheme are collated at the end April in order to get an overview for the full academic year. The full-year figure for 2005/2006 was 7,285 and this increased 8,090 for 2006/2007 and to 8,883 for 2007/2008. This represents an increase of 22% in the number availing of the back to education allowance during those periods. The figures for the 2008/2009 academic year are not yet available but it is expected that they will show a significant increase.
In September 2008, the Department commenced an activation programme which is delivered at local level through its Facilitator network. The programme aims to facilitate progression for social welfare customers of working age into employment, or training or appropriate education opportunities. Activities under this programme will support and promote the uptake of the back to work and back to education schemes.
151. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her Department has plans to introduce paid paternity leave. [39489/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The introduction of a paternity benefit payment would be contingent on an underlying entitlement to statutory paternity leave. Responsibility for issues relating to paternity leave rests with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Following commitments made in the social partnership agreement ‘Towards 2016’, a Working Group led by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been convened to review the level of provision of maternity leave and of paternity leave.
[640]The group, in which the Department of Social and Family Affairs participates, is currently examining options with regards to both maternity and paternity provision and is due to conclude its deliberations before the end of 2008. The work of the group will be informed by the commitment in the Programme for Government to, increase paid maternity leave by five weeks, make all leave after the first 26 weeks available to either parent, and examine the possibility of introducing a statutory entitlement to paternity leave and shared parental leave, these changes to be introduced over the next five years.
152. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the commitment in the programme for Government to provide free broadband to older people; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [37153/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The telephone allowance is a component of the household benefits package which also includes the electricity/gas allowance and free television license schemes. The package is generally available to people living in the State, aged 66 years or over who are in receipt of a social welfare payment or who satisfy a means test. It is also available to people aged under 66 who are in receipt of certain social welfare disability payments or carer’s allowance. There are currently in the region of 355,000 people in receipt of the household benefits at an annual cost of €317 million.
The primary objective of the telephone allowance scheme is to ensure access to help in an emergency and to provide an element of security. A secondary objective is to encourage social contact and to assist in the prevention of social isolation for those living alone.
The Department has endeavoured to meet the demands of de-regulation, notably in the telecoms market, where it supports multiple providers within the fixed line telephone business.
A restructuring of the telephone allowance to a cash value was undertaken in 2003 and this has facilitated the inclusion of additional providers in the scheme since July 2004. The scheme was further extended to include mobile phones in April 2007 as a result of improvements announced in Budget 2007.
Since then, people have the choice of either opting for a direct credit to a telephone company for their landline or for a cash payment in respect of their mobile phone. This means that it is no longer necessary for a person to have a fixed line phone in order to benefit from the telephone allowance. There are currently approximately 15,000 people availing of the mobile phone option.
The Programme for Government includes a commitment to extend the scheme further to incorporate broadband services for older people. The Department is currently examining how best to implement this commitment. It should be noted that where people access the internet using a landline, the telephone allowance applies to their bill usage and will cover the cost of calls or internet usage up to the level of their allowance.
Question No. 153 answered with Question No. 111.
Question No. 154 answered with Question No. 107.
Question No. 155 answered with Question No. 143.
156. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number [641]of claims for one parent family payment being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39450/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The one-parent family payment is a means tested income support scheme for separated, unmarried and widowed persons who are rearing a child or children without the support of a partner.
The number of people in receipt of one-parent family payment at 31 October 2008 is 85,977. The corresponding figure for the end of October 2007 was 84,462 and 82,524 at the end of October 2006.
The increase in the number of claims being processed is due in the main to changes in the income limit for entitlement to one-parent family payment over the period. The weekly income limit was increased from €293 to €375 in May 2006, to €400 from May 2007 and to €425 from May 2008.
157. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the continuing problems experienced by former workers of Tara mines in relation to their pensions; and the steps she has taken to address these difficulties. [39507/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Representatives of Tara Mines Disabled Workers and Pensioners Association have been in touch with the Department over a number of years in relation to the operation of the Tara Mines scheme. The issues raised are multifaceted and include the interaction of the pension scheme with the associated income continuance plan, the employment status of disabled miners and, more recently, the election of trustees to the pension scheme.
Many of the issues raised which can impinge on a person’s pension entitlements, are often not matters which come within the scope of the Pensions Act, and are therefore outside the remit of my Department and the Pensions Board.
A particular issue which is often raised is the issue of income continuance plans. These plans are designed to maintain the income of a disabled worker until he/she reaches normal pension age. However, the income continuance plans is confused with the occupational pension plans despite the fact that are totally separate in their legal structure, status and operations. Such income continuance plans are, in fact, insurance policies and they come within the remit of the Financial Regulator.
The Pensions Board has looked at the complaints raised in so far as they relate to the operation of the pension scheme, and found that the scheme was being operated in accordance with the rules. It also assisted with an independent examination of the plan by nominating a Senior Counsel to be appointed by Tara Mines to undertake a review of the overall pensions plan, the income continuance plan and its underlying insurance policy, and any general employment and contract law entitlement arising. Again it was found that the schemes were operating in accordance with the rules.
Representatives of the group in question have met my predecessors on a number of occasions and, indeed, I met them recently myself to discuss the situation. At this stage, I think it is clear that whatever remaining issues exist do not come within the remit of the Department or the Pensions Board. Nevertheless, officials of the Department will shortly meet with those concerned to discuss outstanding issues.
158. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the action she will take to ensure that the definition of an orphan under social welfare legislation is amended in order that it includes the scenario in which a child has no parent available to them due to the incarceration of their parent or parents; and the reason this is not provided for in the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008. [39555/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Guardians’ payment schemes allow for the provision of a weekly allowance to a guardian of a child who has either been orphaned or whose parents have abandoned and failed to provide for the child.
Section 2(1) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005 defines an orphan as a qualified child—
where that child is not residing with a parent, adoptive parent or step-parent.
All claims for Guardian’s payment are decided by a Deciding Officer appointed by the Minister under Section 299 of the Social Welfare (Consolidation) Act, 2005. Prior to decision, claims are referred to a Social Welfare Inspector in order to establish if the conditions of entitlement are fulfilled. The Social Welfare Inspector completes a report on all relevant issues and this report is then referred to the Deciding Officer to make a decision on the claim.
A parent’s committal to prison alone is not considered a sufficient qualifying criterion to satisfy the legislative definition of orphan. Each case is decided based on the individual circumstances. Factors such as the length of incarceration, the previous and continuing level of contact with the child and the level of the parents’ involvement in the welfare of the child are among the factors taken into account in determining if the legislative provision relating to abandonment and failure to provide is satisfied.
Where a child whose parent/s have been incarcerated is cared for by another person for the period of that incarceration and their carer is in receipt of a social welfare payment (other than a Guardian’s payment), an increase for a qualified child may be payable for each child.
In light of the above, I do not propose to amend the current definition of an orphan.
Question No. 159 answered with Question No. 126.
Question No. 160 answered with Question No. 113.
Question No. 161 answered with Question No. 150.
162. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her intentions to increase child specific welfare payments to reflect the higher cost to low income families of raising teenagers. [39556/08]
[643]Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Among the main objectives of the Department’s child income support policies is the alleviation of poverty among families with children and the facilitation and encouragement of employment by parents, as it is recognised that employment by a parent is the best route out of poverty. The main policy instruments used for achieving these objectives are child benefit, increases in weekly social welfare payments for qualified children (IQCs), family income supplement (FIS) and the back to school clothing and footwear allowance.
The recent Budget provides for a range of measures costing over €56 million to benefit children and families. These measures include an increase of €2 (8.3%) in the IQCs, bringing them up to €26 per week from January 2009. In addition, all FIS income thresholds are being increased by €10 per week per child, giving increases ranging between €6 for a one child family to €48 per week for a family with eight or more children from January 2009 (the current average weekly FIS payment is almost €99). The income threshold for the back to school clothing and footwear scheme is being increased by €50 per week from €100 to €150 to allow more families to qualify.
Significant progress has been achieved over the past decade in reducing poverty among children. For instance, the rates of child benefit have been increased by between 185% and 200% in the period from 2001 to 2008, while total expenditure on the scheme has increased by almost 300% during the same period.
In the context of the current economic circumstances it has been necessary for the Government to take a number of steps to reduce overall public expenditure in order to restore order and stability in the public finances.
In this regard, it has been decided that Child Benefit, which is paid regardless of means, will no longer be paid in respect of those who are 18 years old. At that stage, they are effectively treated as adults in most respects. This change will be phased in gradually. A half payment will be made in respect of existing and future qualifying children from January 2009 and from January 2010 the payment will cease from the 18 birthday.
However, it is recognised that any changes in child benefit entitlements may have implications for family budgets. Accordingly, in order to protect the more vulnerable in society, special alleviating measures are being introduced for those in low income and social welfare dependent households. A compensatory payment of €15 is being provided during 2009 and 2010 for any week during which those affected by this measure are receiving a social welfare payment which includes an increase in respect of the 18 year old child or a family income supplement payment which includes payment in respect of that child. In addition, households affected by the measure who also qualify for the back to school clothing and footwear allowance will receive an extra payment of €215, bringing the total payment in respect of such a child to €520. These transitional measures will cease in January 2011.
163. Deputy Seán Barrett asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will take the necessary steps to bring to the notice of members of the public, who may be unaware of their rights, to deferred pensions from previous employment under pension funds of previous employers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39479/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Regulations made under the Pensions Act 1990 prescribe the range of information that must be issued periodically to a pension scheme member. However, regulations do not require schemes to issue this information to former employees who still retain rights to deferred pensions on foot of their previous [644]membership of an occupational pension. It is therefore only at retirement that such schemes attempt to contact former members.
Each year, my Department is contacted by pension companies who have lost contact with former members. The Department has recently put in place safe procedures for a host mailing service whereby companies can supply brief letters to the Department who will then forward them to their intended recipients, based on current address records stored. This ensures that people’s contact details are kept confidential.
The issue of ongoing contact between employees and previous employers’ pension schemes is currently being analysed by both my Department and the Pensions Board with a view to bringing forward a range of options to improve the level of information available to former scheme members. I am confident that once key issues such as data protection and confidentiality are addressed, proposals will be developed.
164. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position regarding the research project, commissioned by her Department to examine the factors behind the level of take up on the family income supplement, due to be completed in July 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39462/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Department has consistently publicised the Family Income Supplement (FIS) scheme in order to maximise uptake by qualified families. Significant improvements in the qualifying income limits and ongoing awareness campaigns have resulted in a strong upward trend in the level of new claims.
There are currently over 26,000 families in receipt of FIS. In 2007 the Department received 36,900 new FIS claims compared to 33,000 in 2006 and 23,000 in 2005 — an increase of over 60% on 2005 and 11% on 2006. In the first ten months of 2008, over 37,000 claims were received compared to some 33,900 in the same period in 2007 — an increase of over 9%.
The reasons for a perceived lack of take-up of FIS have been the subject of significant Parliamentary and interest group enquiry. To address the issue the Department commissioned a specific research project to establish the reasons behind the level of take up for the scheme.
The main objectives of the project are: to measure current levels of awareness of the Family Income Supplement, to measure perceived eligibility to apply among respondents, to establish whether they had applied in the past and to identify any perceived barriers to applying for the scheme, to gain an understanding of how the Department can effectively maximise uptake of FIS, to investigate awareness and effectiveness of the Department’s advertising for the FIS, with particular emphasis on the campaign initiated in March 2006, to review the effectiveness of communications about FIS from the Department itself and through different information channels available to customers, to examine and attempt to reconcile the findings from the ESRI in 2005 which suggested that there was a large group of potentially eligible claimants of FIS who were failing to do so. The project is at the final stage at present and is expected to complete shortly.
165. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs her target to reduce the number of hours lost through absenteeism in her Department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39503/08]
[645]Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): In 2005 my Department introduced a comprehensive Attendance Management Policy which provides for the active management of absenteeism by, among other measures, highlighting the importance of good attendance to the Department in the delivery of its services and clearly setting out the duties and responsibilities of all staff and managers in this area.
The objective of the Attendance Management Policy is to maximise attendance and minimise absenteeism to the greatest extent possible. In this regard measures set out in the Policy reflect best practice across all sectors both nationally and internationally and these are kept under review for the purposes of evaluating and, where necessary, increasing their effectiveness.
The measures include return to work interviews, a comprehensive Health Promotion Policy and supports for staff who are returning to work after a long term illness.
My Department also works closely with the Chief Medical Officer who plays a crucial role in advising the Department on employee’s fitness for work from a medical perspective.
166. Deputy John Perry asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number of claims for respite care grant being processed here; the way this compares to the number of applicants being processed in the same period in 2006 and 2007; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39459/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I understand the information required by the Deputy is the total number of applications for Respite Care Grant received, by the end of October, for each of the years 2006 to 2008, together with the number allowed and the number refused.
The information requested is detailed in tabular form as follows. Discrepancies between total applications received and those decided are due to the fact that some Respite Care Grant applications are ultimately decided as part of claims for Carers Allowance or Carers Benefit. The grant is paid automatically to recipients of these primary payments. In addition, some cases require further investigation to establish entitlement.
The reduction in applications received in 2008 is primarily due to the fact that quite a number of those who received the stand alone grant in 2007 became entitled to the new half-rate Carer’s Allowance which entitles them to an automatic payment of the grant.
167. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Taoiseach the number of staff employed by Ministers of State in his Department whose function it is to deal with representations from the Ministers of State’s constituency; the number of these staff that are located in the constituency and in his Department; the grade and remuneration at which these staff are employed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39193/08]
[646]The Taoiseach: The information requested by the Deputy regarding staff employed in the Constituency Offices of the Government Chief Whip and Minister of State at my Department is detailed in the schedule as follows. The Constituency Office of the Minister of State for European Affairs is based in the Department of Foreign Affairs.
The Government Chief Whip, who is also the Minister of State at the Department of Defence has opted for convenience purposes to have no Constituency Office based in the Department of Defence, but instead has one Clerical Officer from that Department assigned to his Constituency Office in Government Buildings. This Clerical Officer is paid by the Department of Defence.
168. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Taoiseach the number of staff employed in his Department whose function it is to deal with representations from his constituency; the number of these staff that are located in the constituency and in his Department; the grade and remuneration at which these staff are employed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39194/08]
The Taoiseach: A total of eight staff are employed between my Constituency Offices in Government Buildings and my Tullamore Office. The information requested by the Deputy on these staff is detailed in the schedule as follows:
169. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Taoiseach the systems his Department has in place for tracking absences from work for various reasons, for benchmarking them against best standards and for estimating the cost of cover or lost input as a result of these absences; and if he will present data for the most recent year on this matter. [39195/08]
[647]The Taoiseach: My Department uses the PeopleSoft Human Resource Management and the Flexi Time Systems to record and track all absences from work, e.g. annual leave, special leave, sick leave and maternity leave. This data is used by the Department to monitor compliance with the provisions of the Organisation of the Working Time Act and Department of Finance Guidelines and Circulars.
As in the case of all organisations, allowance is made for leave entitlements in determining overall staffing complements. There is no specific system in place to estimate the costs of cover or lost input as a result of these absences which is only provided in exceptional circumstances. The average level of staff absenteeism within my Department in the last year is 5.5 days per staff member.
170. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an estimate of the cost of legal services which his Department paid for in 2007 and to date in 2008; and if he is satisfied that effective measures are in place to minimise this cost. [39316/08]
The Taoiseach: The cost of legal services funded by my Department’s Vote in 2007 and to date in 2008 is contained in the following tables:
| Year | Cost of Legal Service |
|---|---|
| € | |
| 2007 | 12,196.80 |
| 2008 | 300.00 |
| Year | Cost of Legal Service |
|---|---|
| € | |
| 2007 | 26,710.00 |
| 2008 | 17,429.00 |
| Year | Cost of Legal Service |
|---|---|
| € | |
| 2007 | 298,614.71 |
| 2008 | 0.00 |
It should be noted that payments in respect of the Moriarty Tribunal are not included.
I am satisfied that effective measures are in place to minimise cost on legal services.
171. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Taoiseach the number of capital projects which have gone over budget in each of the past five years; the original estimate for each of these projects; the final cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39530/08]
[648]The Taoiseach: My Department had no capital projects within the past five years.
172. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Taoiseach the severance packages for each retiring staff member in his Department over the past three years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39545/08]
The Taoiseach: My Department does not pay severance packages to retiring staff. Under the Superannuation Act, all Civil Servants retiring from my Department are entitled to an annual pension and lump sum. The pension arrangements including calculations and payment of same, are a matter for the Department of Finance.
Severance packages are made only to Ministerial personal staff whose employment is terminated as a result of the cessation of office of the Minister/Minister of State concerned and who have no jobs to which they are entitled to return. These are not regarded as retirements.
173. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the number of staff in the Office of the Attorney General with a breakdown of the number of barristers, solicitors and non-lawyers. [39550/08]
The Taoiseach: There are currently 115 permanent staff working in the Office of the Attorney General, 35 are barristers and 12 are solicitors, 68 are not lawyers. They provide secretarial services, a Legal Library and a Registry which maintains legal files and tracks correspondence, as well as the usual range of administrative functions such as HR, IT, Finance and Corporate Services. These supports enable the legal professional staff to devote more time to the tasks for which they were recruited.
There are also 16 staff working on a contract basis. Of these, eight are conducting legal research and have law degrees. A further six are involved in the drafting of legislation and two have typing/administrative duties. The six people involved in drafting are from outside the State, so their legal qualifications tend to encompass both of the legal professions.
174. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Taoiseach the details of the development works undertaken by his Department under section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39653/08]
The Taoiseach: No works have been undertaken under section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act since it was enacted in 2000, in respect of my Department’s offices.
175. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Taoiseach if, in the interest of reducing paper use, he has plans to relax or drop the requirement to supply three or more hard copies of tender documentation and to move towards greater use of electronic documentation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39741/08]
The Taoiseach: There is no specific policy requirement by my Department to receive hard copies of tender documentation in response to all requests for tender. The national public procurement website www.etenders.gov.ie, known as etenders has a facility for the submission of tenders electronically. In fact, in a number of cases, my Department has adopted the practice [649]of providing tenderers with the option of providing documentation in either format, electronic or hard copy. It is intended to continue this practice.
176. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Taoiseach the public transport services used by him since he came into office or since 2007 on official business; the destinations travelled to; the cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39800/08]
The Taoiseach: I have not used public transport services (bus or rail) since May 7th, 2008 and therefore have not incurred any expenditure in relation to same.
177. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Taoiseach the public transport services used by his officials since 2007 on official business; the cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39828/08]
The Taoiseach: The following table outlines the cost to my Department of public transport services used by my officials since 2007 to date.
| Year | Type of Public Transport | Cost |
|---|---|---|
| € | ||
| 2007 | Train | 10,824.47 |
| Bus | 1,345.76 | |
| 2008 (Jan-Oct) | Train | 10,985.33 |
| Bus | 1,200.86 |
178. Deputy Charlie O’Connor asked the Taoiseach the latest unemployment figures at the Tallaght social welfare centre; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39876/08]
Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Pat Carey): The Live Register series gives a monthly breakdown of the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s Benefit, Jobseeker’s Allowance and other registrants as registered with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Figures are published for each county and each Local Social Welfare Office. The most recent information is for October 2008. The Live Register figure for the Tallaght Local Office in Dublin in October 2008 was 5,526 persons.
It should be noted that the Live Register is not a definitive measure of unemployment as it includes part-time workers, and seasonal and casual workers entitled to Jobseekers Benefit or Allowance. The exact area covered by each Local Office is not limited to the immediate locality, or county, of the particular office. For instance, in the Tallaght Local Office there may be registered persons from the Blessington area.
179. Deputy John Deasy asked the Taoiseach the amount the process of decentralisation has cost the taxpayer to date excluding the cost of all sites or buildings acquired; and the cost for each individual location. [40159/08]
[650]The Taoiseach: There are no proposals to decentralise my Department or any of the agencies under its aegis. The Department of Finance has responsibility in Government for the overall Decentralisation Programme.
180. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will report on her discussions with a company (details supplied) in respect of the plant in Limerick.. [39205/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The fact that Dell is undertaking a fundamental review of its manufacturing operations and global business model has been in the public domain for some time. It is standard IDA Ireland practice, where any of its client companies is undertaking reviews of this type, to engage with the company with a view to mitigating the impact on the company’s Irish operations. I can confirm that IDA has been engaged in extensive discussions with the company concerned at the highest level. I have been fully briefed on these discussions as they have occurred and I have also met with the company. As I have said in previous replies and as has been said in recent adjournment debates, such contacts with companies always proceed on a confidential basis and it is vitally important, if the best possible outcome for the Irish operations is to be secured, that confidentiality is respected.
181. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the role the National Standards Authority of Ireland has in respect of companies or individuals who register with the Private Security Authority; if a charge is involved; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39227/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The Private Security Authority (PSA), established under the Private Security Services Act 2004 and operating under the remit of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, is the regulatory body for the private security industry. I understand that under the Act it is compulsory for private security contractors to be licensed by the PSA. In order to obtain a licence from the PSA the security provider must, among other things, be certified as being compliant with relevant Irish and European standards.
The National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) is one of a number of bodies, authorised by the PSA, to certify companies or sole traders providing security services which require a certificate of compliance by the PSA. The NSAI have advised me that the cost of certification varies according to the scheme or schemes being certified and with the scope of the security services being provided.
182. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she has reviewed the recent significant job losses in the motor sales sector in view of the fact that it has been reported that as many as 2,000 workers have been let go from car dealerships here; if she will bring forward measures to target unemployment in this sector; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39232/08]
[651]Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Many sectors, including the motor trade, are being affected by the downturn in the economy. The Government is taking decisive action in this regard. FÁS and the Department of Social and Family Affairs are working together to respond quickly to the rising Live Register numbers, for example: FÁS is, with the Local Employment Services provided by Area-Based Partnerships, currently gearing up its Employment Services further to provide increased capacity for expected increased referrals from the Live Register and FÁS is providing a range of certified, short, flexible, modular programmes designed to upskill redundant workers so that they can enhance their prospect of securing employment. The frequency and range of these programmes will be expanded over the coming months. Those who become redundant because of company restructuring or closure are free to access the full range of services provided by FÁS.
183. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the position in relation to a matter (details supplied). [39294/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): I am very conscious of the need to try to accommodate apprentices who have been made redundant in advance of the completion of their apprenticeships. Last month’s Budget announcement provided an additional €9.5 million to FÁS to enable them to provide employment support services to those who have lost their jobs, including redundant apprentices. This additional allocation will allow FÁS to develop a further initiative to assist redundant apprentices complete their courses.
To date both my Department and FÁS have put in place a series of initiatives to facilitate redundant apprentices complete their apprenticeship. These include the following: through their Employment Services Division, FÁS are focusing on assisting redundant apprentices to source employment, so that they can complete their apprenticeship by receiving the appropriate on-the-job training and undertaking the associated competence-based assessments, FÁS now allow apprentices who are made redundant to progress to their next off-the-job training phase of their apprenticeship, without having to do the next on-the-job phase first, FÁS have put into place a register of redundant apprentices in order to identify them at the earliest possible point in time and prioritised the need to locate an employer to sponsor the completion of the “off-the-job” training for apprentices and FÁS will not allow employers who make an apprentice redundant to subsequently recruit another apprentice in the same trade before the apprenticeship period of the redundant apprentice has expired.
184. Deputy James Reilly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if, with reference to the recent commitment given in Dáil Éireann to bring forward amending legislation to facilitate direct negotiations between the Irish Medical Organisation, the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Executive, it is proposed to include other similar medical professional groups (details supplied) in that amending legislation who supply medical services nationally and are of national importance and strategic interest in the delivery of an efficient professional medical service here; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39303/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Section 4 of the Competition Act 2002 prohibits and makes void all agreements between under[652]takings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition in trade in any goods or services in the State or in any part of the State.
This reflects the provisions of EC Treaty Article 81 which contains a similar prohibition in relation to agreements, decisions and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States. In general there is nothing to prevent the State, as a purchaser of services, from consulting with representatives of professional organisations in relation to the fees for those services. The key requirement in all cases is that the State must have the final say in setting the price it will pay for the services concerned.
In recent years both the Health Service Executive and the Department of Health and Children received legal advice which identified significant competition and procurement law issues such that it was not permissible to develop contracts for service and the associated fee arrangements through a negotiated process with the IMO under current arrangements. These matters are governed by both European Union and national competition law.
The Government is satisfied that the scope of the engagement by General Practitioners in the delivery of primary healthcare for the overall efficacy of the public health system makes a more direct form of engagement with the representatives of General Practitioners both necessary and desirable in order to protect public health. Accordingly, it is the intention, in the public interest to attain the objective of protecting public health, to pursue appropriate amendments to Section 4 of the Competition Act 2002 to enable the IMO to represent its members in negotiations with the HSE and the Department of Health and Children in respect of the services provided to the public health service.
The case, if any, for adopting a similar approach to other professional representative bodies would need to be examined in the light of the objective of ensuring a high level of public health protection and associated public interest considerations, and the scope to adopt such an approach in a manner consistent with EU competition law.
During the recent Social Partnership talks, Government committed itself to introducing legislation amending Section 4 of the Competition Act 2002 to the effect that certain categories of vulnerable workers, formerly or currently covered by collective agreements, when engaging in collective bargaining, would be excluded from the Section 4 prohibition. This commitment will take into account that there would be negligible negative impacts on the economy or on the level of competition and will have regard to the specific attributes and nature of the work involved, subject to consistency with EU competition rules. It is proposed that three specific categories of worker, namely voice-over actors, freelance journalists and session musicians will be covered by the exclusion. I can confirm that work is under way between the Department of Health and Children and Enterprise, Trade and Employment on the issue of amending Section 4 of the Competition Act 2002, in a manner consistent with EU competition law and national policy.
185. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will provide an estimate of the cost of legal services which her Department paid for in 2007 and to date in 2008; and if she is satisfied that effective measures are in place to minimise this cost. [39310/08]
[653]Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The information requested by the Deputy in so far as my Department is concerned is set out in the following table:
It is the practice to seek provision of services under Public Procurement guidelines and I am happy that adherence to these guidelines is an effective manner of minimising costs.
186. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the breakdown for 2006, 2007 and to date in 2008 of the expenditure by FÁS in relation to apprentices; the expected expenditure for the remainder of 2008; the budgeted expenditure for 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39328/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): FÁS expenditure on the apprenticeship system since 2006 is as follows:
| Year | €m |
|---|---|
| 2006 (full year) | 113 |
| 2007 (full year) | 129 |
| 2008 (To Sept.) | 91 |
| 2008 (Oct-Dec)* | 38 |
187. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of apprentices registered with FÁS in 2006, 2007 and to date in 2008; the number of further registrations expected by the end of 2008 and 2009; the breakdown of such registrations by sector; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39329/08]
[656]Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The number of apprentices newly registered with FÁS since 2006 broken down by sector and projected registrations during the balance of this year and in 2009 is as follows:
[657]It should be noted that the figures for the remainder of this year and for 2009 are provisional. The significant reduction in apprentice registrations for 2008 and 2009 is due to the major decrease in activity in the construction sector. Registrations in the construction and electrical trades are most affected.
188. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the date, in regard to the decision announced in budget 2009 to amalgamate the national Consumer Agency and the Competition Authority, by which this amalgamation will be achieved; if legislation will be required to give affect to this decision; if so, when this legislation will be published; if savings are anticipated from this decision in 2008, 2009 and 2010; the breakdown of these savings; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39331/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Since the announcement in the budget by my colleague the Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan TD, of the merging of the National Consumer Agency and the Competition Authority, my Department has being working in conjunction with both bodies to bring about a smooth transition to a unified single body to oversee the area of competition and consumer protection.
As both the National Consumer Agency and the Competition Authority were established under statute, it will be necessary to give effect to the newly merged body by way of primary legislation. Whilst I am committed to introducing this legislation as soon as possible, it is not possible at this early stage to give a precise date as to when the necessary legislation will be published. Similarly, whilst it is expected that the synergies arising from the merger of the two bodies will result in savings to the exchequer, particularly in areas such as shared services, it is not possible to precisely quantify the amount of savings involved at this stage.
189. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will support a matter (details supplied). [39337/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The apprenticeship programme is a training and development programme, which provides apprentices with the skills, knowledge and competencies leading to the award of an advanced craft certificate. The programme involves the development of practical skills and related theoretical knowledge over a seven-phase programme — three off-the-job phases and four on-the-job with an employer.
Apprentices undertake modular assessment during each off-the-job phase. FÁS records show that most of the 9% of apprentices who do not succeed in their phase 6 evaluation, fail to achieve the required standard in their theory assessment. Apprentices’ mathematical abilities are assessed as part of this theory assessment. There are currently 766 apprentices who have not yet achieved the required standard.
Apprentices can re-sit the examination and are encouraged to undertake additional learning in the interim. FÁS and the Institutes of Technology have provided refresher courses for such apprentices including courses specifically in Maths. In addition FÁS have established a project team to examine issues related to the maths and science component of the apprenticeship programme. FÁS is currently examining how redundant apprentices can continue to receive their on-the-job training with the support of employers.
190. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of jobs created by the Industrial Development Authority within the Border, midland and western region for each of the past five years; if this equates to 50% of the jobs created by the IDA during that period; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39352/08]
191. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if it is the policy of the Government and the Industrial Development Authority to create 50% of all jobs created by the IDA within the Border, midland western region; the proposals for 2008 in this regard; the method by which the IDA intend to fulfil the 50% target; the sectors in which this will be achieved; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39353/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 190 and 191 together.
IDA Ireland is the agency with statutory responsibility for the attraction of foreign direct investment (FDI) to Ireland and its regions. The marketing of individual areas for new or expansion FDI investments and jobs is a day-to-day operational matter for the Agency. While I may give general policy directives to the Agency, I am precluded under the Industrial Development Acts from giving directives regarding individual undertakings or from giving preference to one area over others.
In the period 2003 to 2007, a total of 9,584 new jobs (both Greenfield and expansion) were created by IDA client companies in the BMW Region. The following tabular statement (Table 1) shows the number of jobs created in each of the years in question. For the period 2000 to 2006 IDA Ireland set a high-level performance target for the Objective 1 (BMW) Area, which committed the Agency to work to deliver a target of 50% of all new Greenfield jobs to be located in the Objective 1 Area. Despite difficult global trading conditions, substantial progress was achieved against this target and in that period 36% of all new Greenfield jobs were located in the area. This represents a rolling average calculated over the seven-year period and these are shown for each year in Table 2.
In recent years, Ireland has undergone a transformation from a low wage/low cost economy towards a high value and knowledge-based one. Arising from this transformation, the nature of foreign direct investment (FDI) has changed and Ireland is now competing for premium mobile investments against the most advanced countries in the world. A key aspect of the high value, knowledge intensive FDI, for which Ireland now competes, is that it increasingly favours locations in or near centres of urban scale, where it has access to the concentrations of infrastructure, skills and services it needs.
Accordingly, IDA Ireland has aligned its strategy with the National Spatial Strategy (NSS). In line with the NSS, IDA is focused on delivering investments to the Gateway and Hub locations nationally, and specifically those in the BMW region. This strategy involves matching investor requirements with the competencies, infrastructure and critical mass of the Gateway and Hub locations to secure the maximum number of investment for Ireland. In keeping with this strategy a total of 64% of new investments were located outside Dublin in 2007.
The key sectors of focus for IDA are Life Sciences, Information and Communications Technologies and high value Services activities. In this connection, it must be remembered that, under the revised EU Regional Aid Guidelines, the BMW and South East Regions are the only areas where Regional aid is available up to 2013. Ultimately it is the investor who decided where to locate.
[659]In recent years IDA has supported the development of the BMW Region by substantially increasing the size and remit of its regional offices in the area. Today, over 80 staff are based in its regional offices in Athlone and Sligo.
Delivering regionally based innovative, world class property solutions is a priority for the Agency. A successful example of this approach has been the delivery of an advance planning permission for a Biopharmaceutical facility in Oranmore, Co Galway. This is a truly unique marketing resource and the first of its kind in Ireland.
Despite the difficult economic situation in which we find ourselves, I am satisfied that the policies being pursued by the Government and the work on the ground being carried out by the development agencies will continue to bear fruit in terms job creation and investment for the Region.
| 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BMW | 45% | 43% | 44% | 46% | 41% | 39% | 36% |
| South & East | 55% | 57% | 56% | 54% | 59% | 61% | 64% |
192. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of Industrial Development Authority jobs created in County Mayo for each of the past five years; the accumulated total as a percentage of IDA jobs created in that five year period; the investment involved; the number of jobs by sector created; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39355/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): IDA Ireland is the agency with statutory responsibility for the attraction of foreign direct investment (FDI) to Ireland and its regions. The marketing of individual areas for new or expansion FDI investments and jobs is a day-to-day operational matter for the Agency. While I may give general policy directives to the Agency, I am precluded under the Industrial Development Acts from giving directives regarding individual undertakings or from giving preference to one area over others.
In the past five years a total of 493 new jobs were created in IDA supported companies in County Mayo, which represents 1% of all new jobs created in IDA supported companies in the country in the same period. The following tabular statement sets out the number of new jobs created, by sector, in each of the years in question. In the 5 year period, 2003 to 2007, a total of €5.4m. has been paid in grants to IDA supported companies in County Mayo.
IDA recognises the need to provide high value employment opportunities in the key towns in Mayo that provide sustainable long-term jobs. In line with the National Spatial Strategy (NSS) the linked hub of Castlebar/Ballina and the town of Westport are priority locations for IDA and are being actively promoted for new FDI. IDA is committed to the development of Mayo and is working continuously with the existing client base to deepen the global strategic [660]importance of the Irish operations within their parent corporations. In addition, the Agency is investing significantly in the provision of planned and focused property solutions in the county by developing world class Business and Technology Parks in Ballina, Westport, and Castlebar. This is an essential marketing tool in the process of attracting potential new investors to the county.
At present there are 19 IDA supported companies in Mayo employing almost 3,000 people in permanent jobs and approximately 500 more in temporary and contract employment. I am satisfied that the actions of the development agencies will continue to bear fruit in terms of economic development for the people of the Mayo. Table showing the number of new jobs, by sector, created in County Mayo in each of the years 2003 to 2007.
193. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of capital projects which have gone over budget in each of the past five years; the original estimate for each of these projects; the final cost of same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39523/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Capital funding allocated to my Department is expended through various agencies under the remit of my Department, including IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland, Science Foundation Ireland, FAS, Shannon Development, InterTradeIreland, the National Standards Authority of Ireland and the 35 County and City Enterprise Boards.
The funding is use by the agencies to operate programmes which provide a range of grants and supports to clients. Capital funding also covers the maintenance and development of the agencies’ property portfolios and the upgrading of equipment. The operation of capital programmes and projects, including budgeting, contracting and monitoring of expenditure, is a day-to-day matter for the agencies concerned.
194. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the severance packages for each retiring staff member in her Department over the past three years; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39538/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): In 2006, 24 members of staff retired from my Department with a pension and lump sum. Pensions in respect of the 24 staff totalled €542,595 per annum, and lump sum payments totalled €1,674,371.
In 2007, 27 staff members retired with an annual pension and lump sum. Pensions in respect of the 27 staff totalled €783,897 per annum, with lump sum payments of €2,355,742 being paid. So far in 2008 19 staff have already retired and a further three have declared their intention to retire before the end of the year. The total pensions for the 22 staff will amount to €621,205 per annum and lump sum payments will amount to €1,921,397.
I consider it inappropriate to give details of the individual amounts involved as it may be possible to identify individual officers. A breakdown of the grades is listed.
195. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the expenditure by FÁS in relation to community employment schemes in 2007 and to date in 2008; the anticipated expenditure for the remainder of 2008 and for 2009; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39639/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Total expenditure in 2007 on the Community Employment (CE) Scheme amounted to €357.5 million. As at 26 September 2008 expenditure totalled €273.1 million. Current estimates indicate that total expenditure at the end of 2008 will be around €374 million. Discussions on the detail of the FÁS budget for 2009 are currently ongoing.
196. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the details of the development works undertaken by her Department under [662]section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39646/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): No development works have been undertaken by my Department under Section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 which provides inter alia that a Minister of the Government may by order provide that the Planning and Development Act 2000 shall not apply to a proposed development being carried out, by the Minister or on behalf of the Minister, where the Minister is satisfied that the proposed development is required by reason of an accident or emergency.
197. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment her views on the number of small home heating oil distributors which are being taken over by large operators; if her attention has been drawn to the increase in the number of such home heating oil distributors which are selling out over the past year; if this exit of many small oil distributors from the market will lead to anti-competitive pricing arrangements and subsequently lead to higher prices for homeowners; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39679/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): It is the right of any individual or corporation to sell its business and exit the market if it so wishes and it would be inappropriate for the Government to force incumbents to stay in a market. Rather than a reduction in the number of operators in any market necessarily resulting in anti-competitive pricing behaviour, larger companies can benefit from economies of scale and can engage in competitive pricing with rival operators.
198. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if, in the interest of reducing paper use, her Department has plans to relax or drop the requirement to supply three or more hard copies of tender documentation and to move towards greater use of electronic documentation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39734/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The Public Procurement rules do not specify the number of copies of tender documents to be submitted but they do permit contracting authorities to require the submission of tenders solely by electronic means. From a practical point of view it is necessary to have hard copies of the tender documents for each member of the assessment team. If an electronic copy only is provided it is nearly always necessary to print it in order to carry out a comprehensive evaluation. It is usual to have at least two people assess the offer, which necessitates three copies of the documents, as a clean copy is required for the file and for FOI purposes. My Department will consider in future restricting the number of pages to be included in tender documentation and to stipulate that they be printed double-sided.
199. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of people on community employment schemes who have progressed to full [663]time work at the end of their scheme in each of the past three years; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39783/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): Community Employment (CE) is an active labour market programme designed to provide eligible long term unemployed people and other disadvantaged persons with an opportunity to engage in useful work within their communities on a fixed term basis. The programme helps unemployed people to progress to the open labour market by breaking their experience of unemployment through a return to work routine and assists them in enhancing/developing both their technical and personal skills.
I am advised by FÁS that the progression figures from the Community Employment programme into employment or self-employment (both part-time and full-time) are as follows:
200. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the public transport services used by her since she came into office or since 2007 on official business; the destinations travelled to; the cost of same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39793/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): I assume that the Deputy’s question refers to bus and rail travel. I have not had an opportunity since assuming office in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to avail of public transport services on official business. I did have the opportunity to use the train for trips to the South and the South West in my capacity as Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
201. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the public transport services used by her officials since 2007 on official business; the cost of same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39821/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): I am interpreting the Deputy’s question as relating to the use of bus and rail services by my officials.
All travel by staff of my Department on official business is governed by travel and subsistence regulations issued by the Department of Finance. The overriding principle in these regulations is that all official travel should be by the shortest practicable route and by the most economical means of transport available. In this context, bus and rail services are normally the most economical means of transport.
As a general rule, officers are only authorised to use their own transport on official business where suitable public transport is not available, where public transport is available only at equal or greater expense, or where the use of public transport would result in the unnecessary loss of official time.
While public transport is used by my officials wherever possible, it is not always feasible for staff to use bus or rail services. For example, Labour Inspectors may be required to carry out [664]site visits at locations or at times which make the use of public transport impractical. In such instances, the use of an officer’s private car is authorised.
In general, all travel costs — whether in respect of public transport or mileage allowances paid to an officer using his/her private car — are aggregated on my Department’s accounts system. It is not feasible, therefore, to identify separately the cost of public transport used by my officials since 2007, as this exercise would require every expenses claim processed by my Department since January 2007 to be reviewed. My Department processes several thousand expenses claims each year.
202. Deputy John Deasy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the amount the process of decentralisation has cost the taxpayer to date excluding the cost of all sites or buildings acquired; and the cost for each individual location. [40154/08]
Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): My Department, Health and Safety Authority and FÁS have interim decentralised offices in place in Carlow, Kilkenny and Birr respectively.
The information requested by the Deputy is set out in the following tabular statement. The most recent figures for such costs are those as submitted to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service, via the Department of Finance, and relate to the period January 2004 to June 2008.
In addition the National Consumer Agency has confirmed that a total of €557.33 has been incurred in respect of non-capital expenditure.
203. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Finance his views on allowing the higher rate of tax relief in respect of IVF treatment in view of the fact that the cost per cycle of treatment will increase by €1,000 per cycle following budget 2009 changes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39612/08]
230. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Finance if he will allow the higher rate of tax relief in respect of IVF treatment in view of the fact that the cost per cycle of treatment will increase by €1,000 per cycle following budget 2009 changes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39613/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 203 and 230 together.
[665]The position is that, as announced in the Budget, Health Expenses Relief will be granted at the standard rate only from 1 January 2009, with the exception of nursing home expenses where temporary arrangements will apply. Nursing home expenses will be standard rated from 1 January 2010. It is not my intention to make any other adjustments.
204. Deputy Michael Kennedy asked the Minister for Finance his views on the request of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin who has suggested an annual soccer game be played in the Island of Ireland Peace Park in Belgium, as a memorial to those soldiers from both sides of the First World War forces who stopped fighting on Christmas Day 1914 in order to pursue an unofficial ceasefire; if he will advise the person on the way the matter might be pursued; and if he will give his support to the matter. [39675/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Island of Ireland Peace Park at Messines (Mesen), Belgium was opened on 11 November 1998 to commemorate all those from the island of Ireland, from all political and religious traditions, who fought and died in the First World War. On behalf of the Irish and British Governments, the park is jointly managed by the Office of Public Works (OPW) and the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) in Northern Ireland.
The Park is a place of commemoration and reflection and a memorial to those Irishmen who died in the First World War. Because of the configuration and layout of the Island of Ireland Peace Park it would not be possible to hold a football match, but I understand that arrangements are being made by the Irish Embassy in Belgium to hold a commemorative match at a suitable venue nearby.
205. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Finance if he will review the rate structure for the proposed €10 air travel tax; his plans to replace the proposal with a coastline tax; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39870/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I announced in Budget 2009 that an Air Travel Tax will come into force in respect of passengers departing from Irish airports on and from 30 March 2009. A general rate of €10 per passenger will apply, with a lower rate of €2 for shorter journeys. This measure is estimated to yield €95 million in 2009 and €150 million in a full year. This is not an insignificant amount of money and given the current fiscal environment, I do not wish to see this level of anticipated revenue reduced. However, I am aware of a number of issues that were raised subsequent to my Budget announcement and these will be borne in mind in the context of the Finance Bill.
206. Deputy Paul Gogarty asked the Minister for Finance the number by resort of holiday homes, hotels and other developments that were built through the seaside resort renewal scheme; the cost to the Exchequer of the scheme to date; the cost at the termination of the scheme; the cost by resort to the taxpayer in the reliefs secured by the owners of the properties; the benefits that have accrued from the scheme to the resorts in question; if the scheme has been a success or otherwise; the contribution it has made to the Irish economy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39215/08]
[666]Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Pilot Tax Relief Scheme for the Renewal and Improvement of Certain Resort Areas (colloquially known as the Seaside Resort Scheme) was introduced with effect from 1 July 1995 for three years on a pilot basis. The qualifying period was extended in the 1998 Finance Act for a further year to 30 June 1999 for pipeline projects. The scheme was extended again until 31 December 1999 in the 1999 Finance Act. The 15 areas are included in the Seaside Resort Scheme were Bundoran, Enniscrone, Achill, Westport, Salthill, Lahinch, Kilkee, Ballybunion, Clonakilty, Youghal, Tramore, Courtown, Arklow, Bettystown/Laytown/Mosney, Clogherhead.
I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that for the tax year 2003 and earlier years claims for capital allowances for the seaside resort scheme were aggregated in tax returns with other claims and could not be distinguished from other reliefs claimed. Accordingly, the specific information on costs for 2003 and earlier years are not available from that source.
However, a once-off survey of the seaside resort renewal scheme was carried out in 1999 by the Revenue Commissioners the results of which were published in a report on the scheme by an inter-departmental group chaired by the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation. Using indicative information from this survey, the total expected cost of the scheme, rather than annual cost, was estimated at that time to be in the region of €319 million. It was tentatively estimated at that time by Revenue, on the basis of certain assumptions, that the amount of qualifying expenditure and tax cost broken down by resort could be as follows:
Information on the scheme of tax relief for seaside resort renewal scheme was for the first time specified and separately included in personal income tax returns for the tax year 2004, which were due for filing in October, 2005 and in corporation tax returns for accounting periods ended in 2005. Based on the information that has been received and collated to date for the tax years 2004, 2005 and 2006, the following table gives details of number of claims and Exchequer cost in terms of income tax and corporation tax foregone for the seaside resort renewal scheme for each of the years 2004 to 2006.
| Year | Claims | Exchequer Cost |
|---|---|---|
| €m | ||
| 2004 | 1,059 | 10.1 |
| 2005 | 1,190 | 7.3 |
| 2006 | 1,167 | 6.4 |
The information from tax returns cannot be broken down by reference to resorts nor is it possible to provide the information requested on the number of holiday homes, hotel and other developments associated with this tax incentive. I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that data for the tax year 2007 is not yet available as the appropriate income tax and corporation tax returns for that year are either not yet due for filing (by 17 November 2008 in the case of returns filed via ROS) or have only recently been filed but have not yet been processed. With regard to the benefits of the scheme the report on the scheme by the inter-departmental group chaired by the Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation indicated that the scheme had resulted in very significant levels of investment in all the resorts but the investment had been overwhelmingly in self catering accommodation. At the time of publication the estimated output of self catering resorts was between 5000 and 6000 units. However, the report also stated that the scheme did not contribute, in any significant way to the achievement of a key tourism objective “ the attraction of overseas tourists” but probably assisted in the achievement of regional spread in domestic tourism terms and the wider dispersal of the spin off effects of economic growth.
207. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Finance if he will amend the regulations governing the playing of football in the Iveagh Gardens, Dublin 2 at the rear of the National Concert Hall; if he will request the Office of Public Works to arrange for a designated area in the extensive grounds of the Iveagh Gardens to be provided for the playing of football by children; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39244/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): The Iveagh Gardens were laid out as exhibition gardens during the 19th century, with many unusual and unique garden features such as the Maze, Rosarium, Cascade, Grottoes and the sunken Archery Grounds. These are designated as a National Historic Park and the features are designed primarily for passive recreation. It is not proposed to designate any area for the pursuit of sport.
208. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Finance the plans to form a European financial crisis cell to tackle the current financial crisis; the composition, functions and powers of such a cell; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38493/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): One important element of the conclusions of the European Council meeting of 15th and 16th October 2008 was the establishment of a Financial Crisis Cell to enable swift and effective action to be taken in a crisis situation. The cell is a warning, information-exchange and evaluation mechanism involving representatives of the Presidency-in-office, the President of the Commission, the President of the ECB (in conjunction with the other European central banks), the President of the Eurogroup and the governments of the Member States. It is based on existing administrative structures rather than a legal decision and can be activated at any time by a Member State faced with a significant [668]financial stability issue ensuring that information is provided immediately and in confidence to the institutions and all Member States. The establishment of the Cell is an important step in strengthening financial stability contingency planning arrangements in the EU.
209. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Finance if he will make a statement on the practice of mortgage providers failing to pass on interest cuts to customers who are on variable mortgage rates when they had previously increased payments after ECB rate increases. [39256/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): As the Deputy will be aware, in welcoming the European Central Bank’s announcement on 6 November 2008 of a 0.5% reduction in its key interest rates, I highlighted that I would expect financial institutions to pass on these reductions to their customers including in particular to those purchasing properties on variable mortgages but also to small and medium-sized enterprises. This will help support sustainable growth and employment along with the maintenance of price stability in line with the ECB’s objectives.
210. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Finance the number of sites and buildings designated for decentralisation that have been acquired by the State; the amount each site or property cost the State; and when it was acquired. [39285/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): Details of the sites and buildings acquired under the decentralisation programme, the costs incurred to date, and when they were acquired, are outlined in the following table.
211. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Finance the amount the process of decentralisation has cost the taxpayer to date excluding the cost of all sites or buildings acquired; and the cost for each individual location. [39286/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The following table sets out the non-property costs incurred by my Department and the bodies under the aegis of my Department for the decentralisation process broken down by location to end September 2008.
Up to the end of September 2008 my Department has incurred expenditure in the amount of €492,696 in relation to the Decentralisation Implementation Group and €1,864,429 in relation to the Central Decentralisation Unit. The PAS has incurred expenditure in the amount of €533,509 in relation to the staffing of the Central Applications Facility to facilitate the decentralisation programme. The OPW have incurred €268,151 for travel and subsistence in connection with the overall decentralisation programme. Details of the staffing costs and a breakdown by location of the above non-property costs incurred by the OPW in connection with the overall decentralisation programme to end September 2008, will be forwarded directly to the Deputy.
212. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will support a matter (details supplied). [39336/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): As announced in the Budget, health expenses relief will be granted at the standard rate only from 1 January 2009, with the exception of nursing home expenses where temporary arrangements will apply. Nursing home expenses will be standard rated from 1 January 2010.
213. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance when the tax exemption status for artists was introduced; and the details of this provision. [39342/08]
214. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the number of artists annually who have availed of the tax exemption scheme each year since the scheme was introduced. [39343/08]
[673]215. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the amount of money foregone by the Revenue Commissioners annually on the tax exemption scheme for artists since the scheme was introduced. [39344/08]
216. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the top ten recipients of the tax exemption scheme for artists in each of the past ten years; and the amount of tax waivered in each case. [39345/08]
217. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the estimated amount of tax to be waivered in 2008 under the tax exemption scheme for artists. [39347/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 213 to 217, inclusive, together.
The artists tax exemption was introduced in 1969 to help create an environment in Ireland in which the arts could flourish and to encourage artists living abroad to come and live in Ireland. Under the scheme, income earned by artists, writers, composers and sculptors from the sale of their work (books and other writings, plays, musical compositions, paintings and sculptures) is exempt from tax in Ireland in certain circumstances. The exemption is only available to individuals who are resident or ordinarily resident and domiciled here for tax purposes and not resident elsewhere. The exemption is one of the reliefs covered by the restriction on the use of tax reliefs which took effect from 1 January 2007.
With regard to annual figures on the number of artists who have availed of the exemption and the amount of tax foregone, the relevant available information relates to income tax returns filed for the income tax years 1994/1995 to 2005, the latest year for which the relevant detailed information is available, and is set out in the following table. I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that returns of the relevant tax exempt income were not captured in such a way as to provide a basis for compiling the information sought by the Deputy for tax years prior to 1994/95.
With regard to the top ten recipients of the exemption in each of the past ten years, I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that their obligation to observe confidentiality for taxpayers and small groups of taxpayers precludes them from providing the information requested. Finally, projections for income tax receipts are based on assumed movements in macroeconomic parameters and not by reference to the costs of individual tax reliefs. Accord[674]ingly, I am not in a position to provide the data requested by the Deputy for 2008 in respect of the exemption.
218. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Finance if the proposed 1% levy, announced in budget 2009, will be applied to United Kingdom DSS pensions paid in to persons resident here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39464/08]
227. Deputy Seán Ardagh asked the Minister for Finance if State pensions receivable from other EU states will be exempted from the new 1% levy, similar to State pensions of this State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39586/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 218 and 227 together.
The position is that the income levy will be applied to gross income except social welfare payments and contributory and non-contributory social welfare pensions. It is also proposed to exempt those on low incomes from the income levy. Full details on the levy will be set out in the forthcoming Finance Bill.
219. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the surplus received from the national lottery to the Exchequer each year for the past ten years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39474/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The surplus received from the National Lottery in each of the past ten years is as follows: 1998, €141.294 million; 1999, €159.378 million; 2000, €162.807 million; 2001, €175.793 million; 2002, €172.931 million; 2003, €186.702 million; 2004, €191.125 million; 2005, €203.205 million; 2006, €217.526 million; and 2007, €245.480 million.
220. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the amount of funding provided to youth services from the national lottery surplus each year for the past ten years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39475/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The amount of funding provided to youth services (Subhead B9 of the Vote for the Department of Education and Science) from the National Lottery each year between 1999 and 2004 is as follows: 1999, €19,032,267; 2000, €21,399,901; 2001, €23,350,483; 2002, €25,692,000; 2003, €27,123,000; and 2004, €28,624,000. Since 2005, subheads which had previously been funded by the proceeds of the National Lottery have been part-funded by the proceeds of the National Lottery, the balance being provided by the Exchequer. Although we know the percentage of National Lottery funds relative to total expenditure on the aggregate of subheads which are part-funded by the National Lottery, it is not possible to say that any given subhead got a particular percentage of National Lottery funding. The total amount provided in subhead B9 of the Vote for the Department of Education and Science between 2005 and 2008 is as follows: 2005, €33,889,000; 2006, €36,728,000; 2007, €42,617,000; and 2008, €43,733,000. National Lottery funding as a percentage of total expenditure on all subheads which were part-funded by the National Lottery is as follows: 2005, 64%; 2006, 50%; 2007, 52%; and 2008, 56% (estimated).
221. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the action taken in view of the Government decision in the White Paper Supporting Voluntary Activity in 2001 to establish a [675]national lottery fund monitoring committee including representatives of the community and voluntary sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39476/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The National Lottery Beneficiary Fund Monitoring Committee was established by the Department of Finance to oversee the implementation of the recommendations of the 1997 report of the National Lottery Review Group. The Monitoring Committee ceased to exist when it was subsequently decided that the recommendations of the Review Group could better be pursued within the broader context of the then Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs’ consideration of the White Paper on a Framework for Supporting Voluntary Activity and for Developing the Relationship between the State and the Community and Voluntary Sector, rather than via a separate committee. Responsibility for the implementation of the White Paper, which was published in 2000, now rests with the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs.
222. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance his views on circumstances in which a non-executive director of a charity who receives no payment apart from out of pocket expenses from the charity is nominated by the charity and is subsequently appointed to sit on the board, advisory body or committee of another organisation which is not a charity for which they receive and retain a fee; the implications for the designation of the charity for tax purposes by the Revenue Commissioners; the legal basis for such a decision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39477/08]
223. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance his views on whether it would be appropriate for the Revenue Commissioners to take into account fees and payments apart from out of pocket expenses paid to non-executive directors of charities from other bodies to which they were nominated by their charity when determining or reviewing the designation of the charity for tax purposes despite the fact that the bodies making the payments are separate legal entities, are not charities and therefore there is no prohibition on the payment of fees and the work and contribution of the director nominated by the charity is undertaken in their own time; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39478/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 222 and 223 together.
A tax exemption for charities is available under section 207 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997. To avail of this exemption, a body must be established for charitable purposes only and must also apply all of its income for charitable purposes only. With a view to ensuring that this is the case, Revenue generally insists that no director, trustee or officer receives any remuneration or other benefit from the charity. In cases where a director of a charity is nominated by the charity and is subsequently appointed to sit, in their own time, on the board, advisory body or committee of another organisation which is not a charity and receives and retains a fee in respect of such appointment, the payment of such a fee would not normally have implications for the designation of the charity as a tax exempt body. However, Revenue has pointed out that each case is decided on its own merits and, when reaching its decision, Revenue would have to be satisfied that the appointment was a bone fide appointment to an independent board, body or committee.
224. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Finance the number of capital projects [676]which have gone over budget in each of the past five years; the original estimate for each of these projects; the final cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39525/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): My Department’s vote had one capital project in the period to which the Deputy refers where the final cost out-turn exceeded the initial cost estimate. In October 2004, my Department commenced a project to build and fit out a crèche for 80 children in Cork at an estimated cost of €2.5 million as part of the Civil Service child care initiative. The Office of Public Works subsequently advised that a larger crèche catering for 135 children would represent better value for money. In addition, changes to the layout of the ground floor were required to comply with amendments to HSE regulations which occurred after work on the project had commenced. These changes are expected to bring the total cost to €4.4 million when the project is completed in 2009. I have been advised by the following offices under the aegis of my Department that, in the period in question, there were no occasions on which capital projects for which they are or were responsible exceeded their budget: the Commission for Public Service Appointments, the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Office of the Appeals Commissioner, the Office of the Commission for Public Service Appointments, the Office of the Ombudsman, the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, the Public Appointments Service, the State Laboratory and the Valuation Office. The Office of Public Works has been responsible for several hundred capital projects in the relevant period. In the time available, it has been unable to collate the information sought. I have asked that office to communicate the relevant information direct to the Deputy.
225. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Finance the severance packages for each retiring staff member in his Department over the past three years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39540/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Under the terms of the Civil Service Pensions Schemes, all retiring Civil Servants are normally entitled to an annual pension and a retirement lump sum based on final salary and years of service. The amounts granted to staff retiring from my Department under these entitlements in each of the past three years are as follows:
| Number of staff | Pension | Lump Sum | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 9 | 401,075 | 1,377,235 | 1,778,310 |
| 2007 | 9 | 303,938 | 945,072 | 1,249,010 |
| 2008 to date | 12 | 515,231 | 1,722,500 | 2,237,731 |
| Total | 30 | 1,220,244 | 4,044,807 | 5,265,051 |
As the numbers involved are small any further breakdown could lead to the identification of individual staff members and would not be appropriate.
226. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Finance further to Question No. 283 of 24 September 2008, if he will correct this anomaly in view of the fact that the amount paid as rent to the local authority under the shared ownership scheme may amount to several hundred euro per month, in addition to the mortgage repayments, and that these homeowners are low-income by definition. [39573/08]
[677]Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The position, as set out in my reply to Question No. 283 of 24 September 2008, regarding the application of section 473 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 to rent paid to a local authority under the shared ownership scheme, does not represent an anomaly in the taxation code. Rent paid under the Shared Ownership Scheme is designed to cover the cost to local authorities of financing the rented share in the equity of the house. The benefits to participants in the scheme is that, on redemption, the purchaser only has to repay the initial capital outlay, given that the rent charged should more or less cover the interest charges i.e. the cost of borrowings. Shared ownership rents are not, therefore, comparable to the rents paid by tenants to landlords in the private sector. In addition, under the Shared Ownership Scheme, there is an annual subsidy payable towards rent to lower income households. This graded subsidy is used to reduce the household’s annual outgoings and varies from €2,300 to €1,050 on a gross annual household income range of between €13,001 and €28,000.
Question No. 227 answered with Question No. 218.
228. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Finance if the income levy will apply to gross income before the deduction of allowances in the case of companies who are engaged in farming; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39597/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The income levy is applied to individual income earners and not to companies. Full details regarding provisions, in relation to the collection, recovery, inspection of records, and other provisions required in relation to the income levy will be set out in the forthcoming Finance Bill.
229. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Finance if the income levy will apply to gross income before deduction of capital allowances in the case of individuals who are self employed farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39598/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The income levy will apply to all trades and professions at the same rates as will apply to those applying to PAYE and investment income. The income levy will be calculated by applying the appropriate percentage to the self-employed farmer’s gross income, after deduction of only those expenses directly associated with the performance of the trade, i.e. in accordance with the normal principles of commercial accounting. However, no deduction will be allowed for capital allowances. More detailed provisions, in relation to the collection, recovery, inspection of records, and other provisions required will be set out in the Finance Bill.
Question No. 230 answered with Question No. 203.
231. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the average effective rate of corporation tax paid by companies which were liable to be taxed at the nominal rate of 12.5% in 2007; the number of companies that were in this category; the average effective rate of corporation tax paid by companies which were liable to be taxed at the nominal rate of 10% in 2007; the number of companies that were in this category; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39626/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the necessary detailed data for accounting periods of companies ending in 2007 is not yet available. However, on the basis of data available for accounting periods ending in 2006, the information requested is as set out in the following table.
Taxable Income and Gains are trading profits less tax depreciation, plus other non-trading income and gains less deductions and reliefs allowed for tax purposes.
The number of companies shown includes all companies with a corporation tax return for accounting periods ended in 2006, whether liable to tax or not.
232. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the amount of tax that was foregone under each of every property tax-based scheme in 2006 and 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39627/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the amount of tax foregone under each property-based scheme in 2006 is as follows:
[679]It should be noted that the cost of tax relief for property tax based schemes which still remain in the tax code is estimated at just over €34 million for 2006.
I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that data for the tax year 2007 is not yet available as the appropriate income tax and corporation tax returns for that year are either not yet due for filing (by 17th November 2008 in the case of returns filed via ROS) or have only recently been filed but have not yet been processed.
233. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the amount of tax that was foregone under the business expansion scheme and the seed capital scheme respectively in 2006 and 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39628/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the estimated tax foregone in respect of the Business Expansion Scheme and the Seed Capital Scheme for the years 2006 and 2007 is as set out in the following table:
| 2006 | 2007 | |
|---|---|---|
| €m | €m | |
| Business Expansion Scheme | 21.4 | 17.5 |
| Seed Capital Scheme | 1.2 | 2.3 |
234. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Finance the procedures for the assessment of major public projects; the way they are decided upon; the methodology of the cost benefit analysis; the time taken in deciding on the projects; the financial thresholds for deeper analysis; the reporting and dialogue mechanisms within the various Departments and his Department for major capital projects; the level of seniority and qualifications in economics, finance and so on of those who make the final decisions; the length of time after decisions have been made on these analyses, which are important in ensuring value for money in the public service for large capital sums, before publication; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39629/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Revised guidelines for the appraisal and management of capital expenditure were issued by the Department of Finance in February 2005 to encourage a better approach to appraisal and management of capital programmes and projects and to reflect best practice. These guidelines were further supplemented by the Department of Finance VFM circular of 25 January 2006 and the May 2007 letter revising the test discount Rate and issuing procedures for carrying out spot-checks of compliance with the General Conditions of Sanction for Multi-Annual Capital Envelopes. This comprehensive framework for capital expenditure is intended to reflect changes in evaluation, project appraisal and management best practice; to provide for greater clarity and greater understanding in relation to the roles of all those approving capital expenditure, including Government and Ministers; and to secure best Value for Money.
The responsibility for applying the guidelines for particular projects lies with the relevant Government Departments. The guidelines set out a variety of financial thresholds, including the requirement that projects over €30 million undergo a full cost benefit analysis at detailed appraisal stage. Economic cost-benefit analysis is a method which considers the various direct and indirect costs and benefits of investment proposals. Given the diversity of the types of investment proposals across the range of Government Departments and State Agencies, the [680]precise costs and benefits considered will obviously vary across sectors and between projects. My Department has issued a set of working rules for cost-benefit analysis to assist Departments and Agencies in carrying out rigorous and objective cost-benefit analyses of investment proposals and to standardise and bring consistency to key parameter values used. A number of Departments and Agencies have also developed detailed cost-benefit analysis models for use in appraising capital projects. Publication of these is a matter for each relevant Department, but I understand they have been made publicly available in some instances. The guidelines also require Departments and Agencies to put in place systems to report regularly to their management on the evaluation of projects prior to approval and progress on the management of capital projects and capital programmes. They must also arrange to carry out spot-checks for compliance with the capital appraisal guidelines and report on these and on progress generally under their capital envelopes to the Department of Finance.
Decisions on projects are generally a matter for the relevant Department and it is the responsibility of the individual Departments to ensure that decisions are taken at the appropriate level, within the framework of the guidelines, and that the necessary and relevant expertise is brought to bear on the decision-making process. The time taken for assessment and decision-making will vary according to the circumstances of individual projects. It has not been the practice to publish capital appraisals as they generally contain commercially sensitive information, the publication of which could be prejudicial to the State’s capacity to get best value for money in procurement of capital projects. My Department can supply the Deputy on request with the February 2005 Guidelines and the Department of Finance letters of January 2006 and May 2007 or alternatively they are available on my Department’s website.
235. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Finance the details of the development works undertaken by his Department under section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39648/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): No development work has been undertaken by my Department under Section181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000. I have been informed by the Office of Public Works that no orders were signed in that office for work carried out under Section 181 of the 2000 Planning Act . If works were being undertaken on behalf of other Departments, the relevant Departmental Minister would sign the order.
236. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Finance if he will provide for tax relief in the Finance Bill 2008 for the necessary remediation works on vacated SEVESO sites in the Cork docklands in order to facilitate the redevelopment of these areas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39673/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): In my Budget speech on 14 October, I announced the introduction of a new tax incentive scheme to facilitate the relocation of Seveso-listed industrial facilities which hinder the residential and commercial regeneration of Docklands in urban areas. The EU Seveso Directive seeks to protect public safety by placing land-use restrictions on new residential and commercial development near locations where potentially dangerous activities are undertaken. The Deputy will also be aware that I indicated in my speech that this scheme will be subject to clearance by the European Commission from a State Aids perspective. In discussions which have been held between officials and the EU [681]Commission about the regeneration of urban docklands, the Commission has indicated that the use of tax incentives to facilitate the remediation of sites vacated by Seveso-type industrial facilities for any future residential and commercial use will not pass the EU State Aid rules because of the “polluter pays principle”. This ensures that an industry that creates a pollution incident (or in this case, which undertakes the land-use that has damaged a particular location) must bear the cost of remediating the property back to a pre-pollution/pre-damage, land-use basis.
237. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Minister for Finance the circumstances under which a country can apply to the International Monetary Fund for financial assistance; the implications of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39714/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The IMF has developed various loan instruments, or “facilities,” that are tailored to address the specific circumstances of its membership. The bulk of IMF lending is to provide loans to countries experiencing balance of payments problems. This financial assistance enables countries to rebuild their international reserves; stabilise their currencies; continue paying for imports; and restore conditions for strong economic growth. Upon request by a member country, an IMF loan is usually provided under an “arrangement,” which stipulates the specific policies and measures a country has agreed to implement to resolve its balance of payments problem. The economic programme underlying an arrangement is formulated by the country in consultation with the IMF, and is presented to the Fund’s Executive Board in a “Letter of Intent.” Once an arrangement is approved by the Board, the loan is released in phased instalments as the program is implemented.
Low-income countries may borrow at a concessional interest rate through the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) and the Exogenous Shocks Facility (ESF). Non-concessional loans are provided mainly through Stand-By Arrangements (SBA), and occasionally using the Extended Fund Facility (EFF), the Supplemental Reserve Facility (SRF), and the Compensatory Financing Facility (CFF). The IMF also provides emergency assistance to support recovery from natural disasters and conflicts, in some cases at concessional interest rates. Except for the PRGF and the ESF, all facilities are subject to the IMF’s market-related interest rate, known as the “rate of charge,” and some carry a surcharge. The rate of charge is based on the SDR interest rate, which is revised weekly to take account of changes in short-term interest rates in major international money markets. Large loans carry a surcharge. The amount that a country can borrow from the Fund - its “access limit”- varies depending on the type of loan, but is typically a multiple of the country’s IMF quota. In exceptional circumstances, some loans may exceed the access limits.
In addition, the IMF has emergency procedures to help provide financing at short notice. The Emergency Financing Mechanism can be used when a member country faces an exceptional situation that threatens its financial stability and a rapid response is needed to contain the damage to the country or the international monetary system. Last month, the Executive Board of the IMF approved the creation of a Short-Term Liquidity Facility (SLF) to establish quick-disbursing financing for countries with strong economic policies that are facing temporary liquidity problems in the global capital markets. Disbursements under this facility can be up to 500 percent of quota, with a three-month maturity. Eligible countries are allowed to draw a maximum of three times during any -12-month period. Further details regarding the terms and eligibility applying to the Short-Term Facility and the other facilities can be found at www.imf.org.
238. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Finance if, in the interest of reducing paper use, his Department has plans to relax or drop the requirement to supply three or more hard copies of tender documentation and to move towards greater use of electronic documentation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39736/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The public procurement rules do not specify the number of copies of tender documents to be submitted but they do permit contracting authorities to require the submission of tenders solely by electronic means. The national public procurement website www.etenders.gov.ie, known as ‘‘etenders” and provided by the National Public Procurement Policy Unit of the Department of Finance, has a facility for the submission of tenders electronically. The facility has been available to all public sector organisations since early 2005 and has been (and continues to be) promoted for use by all contracting authorities. My Department has accepted tenders electronically for a number of tendering procedures and I expect the level of usage to increase significantly over the coming year.
The ‘‘etenders” website is used by over 2,000 public sector contracting organisations; between 4,000 and 5,000 tenders are advertised each year and acceptance of electronic tenders offers the potential for significant savings in paper usage. The number of organisations using this facility has almost doubled since May 2008 and we expect this growth to increase even more significantly by the end of 2009 as authorities and suppliers become more familiar and more comfortable with the technology. In addition to the acceptance of tenders on-line, the website also permits contracting authorities to make all documentation associated with a request for tender to be made available on-line, for downloading by suppliers. Approximately 75% of contracting authorities already make use of this facility and we expect to achieve close to 100% by end 2009.
239. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will clarify a matter (details supplied). [39743/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): As the Deputy will be aware, in welcoming the European Central Bank’s announcement on 6 November 2008 of a 0.5% reduction in its key interest rates, I highlighted that I would expect financial institutions to pass on these reductions to their customers including in particular to those purchasing properties on variable mortgages but also to small and medium-sized enterprises. This will help support sustainable growth and employment along with the maintenance of price stability in line with the ECB’s objectives.
240. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Finance the tax take on a pint of stout and beer, a measure of spirits, a bottle of beer and stout, a bottle of alcopops and a bottle of wine for 2005, 2006 and 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39772/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the tax take on the listed products for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007 are as shown in the following table.
The prices quoted are taken from the National Average Price Surveys as published by the Central Statistics Office except the prices for a Bottle of Stout where indicative prices are shown for your information.
The Excise content of Beer and Stout is calculated at Alcohol By Volume (ABV) of 4.18%.
241. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Finance the public transport services used by him since he came into office or since 2007 on official business; the destinations travelled to; the cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39795/08]
[684]Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Since my appointment as Minister for Finance on the 7th May 2008, I have not used public transport while on official business.
242. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Finance the public transport services used by his officials since 2007 on official business; the cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39823/08]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): In 2007 and to date in 2008 approximately €42,000 has been spent by officials of my Department on rail and bus travel while on official travel both at home and abroad.
243. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason funding has not been provided to an organisation (details supplied) in County Cork; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39211/08]
244. Deputy Seán Sherlock asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will explain the core funding shortfall being experienced by an organisation (details supplied) in County Cork that is dealing with people with physical and mental disabilities; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39212/08]
287. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has received a request from an organisation (details supplied) in County Cork for funding to provide supervised residential places; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39664/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 243, 244 and 287 together.
The Deputies questions relate to the management and delivery of health and personal services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have these matters investigated and to have replies issued directly to the Deputies.
245. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will give a firm commitment to retain the accident and emergency services at St. John’s Hospital, Limerick. [39206/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Government is committed not only to ensuring the delivery of the best quality health services possible but to doing so in an effective and efficient way. Ensuring patient safety is of paramount importance, so that people can have confidence in the services and that the best possible patient outcomes can be achieved. It is essential that we prioritise patient safety and quality and that we organise and manage services accordingly. The priority is to provide safe services as close as possible to where people live.
The Health Service Executive commissioned Horwath Consultants in association with Teamwork Management Services in February 2007 to examine the arrangements for the provision of acute hospital services in the Mid West with a view to identifying the best configuration of such services in the region including arrangements for A&E, critical care, acute medicine and surgery, together with diagnostic services so that the highest quality of care can be delivered [685]to the population of the region. St John’s Hospital Limerick is encompassed by the strategic review.
The work of the consultants will act as one of the inputs to decisions on how best to reconfigure acute services in the Mid West region and the HSE is currently in the process of finalising its implementation plans in this regard. The Government and the Executive are committed to ensuring that the approach to re-organisation of services is carried out in consultation with the key stakeholders and that each element is progressed incrementally. This approach will produce the best outcome for patients. I am confident that St John’s Hospital will continue to play a significant role in the provision of health services to people in the Mid West region.
246. Deputy Seán Barrett asked the Minister for Health and Children the rationale for the 1% cut in disability funding in both 2008 and 2009, along with the withdrawal of €53 million and €17 million in 2007 and 2008 respectively from the multi-annual disability funding voted in Dáil Éireann; if she will restore these cuts to disability and mental health; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39214/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): Almost €1 billion is provided each year to non-statutory providers of disability services. In line with the efficiency measures being taken elsewhere in the health system, an efficiency reduction of 1% will be applied by the HSE to the allocations of non-statutory disability agencies for 2009. It is envisaged that efficiencies will be achieved in non-frontline areas such as advertising, PR, travel and subsistence and management/administrative payroll costs.
The Office for Disability and Mental Health will be conducting a review in 2009 of non-statutory agencies which provide services for persons with disabilities, which will consider issues of structure, overheads, and coherence of and synergies within the sector with a view to assessing the scope for further efficiencies. This exercise will be undertaken with our focus at all times on the needs of those that we serve.
Under the Multi Annual Investment Programme additional funding of €75m was allocated in both 2006 and 2007. In the 2008 Budget, €50m was provided to the Health Service Executive (HSE) to fund a range of additional services under the Multi Annual Investment Programme for Disability. Although the commencement of the planned developments in disability services this year had been delayed due to a financial review, I am pleased to inform you that the Executive has informed the Department of Health and Children that it is now in the process of rolling out the planned developments. The HSE has indicated that due to the delayed start to some of these developments, it expects to spend €33m of the €50m by the end of 2008. The resulting €17m time related savings were included in this Department’s budgetary consolidation measures announced to the House in July 2008.
As the issues raised by the Deputy are matters for the HSE under the Health Act 2004, I have requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
247. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children the budgetary changes to the national child care investment programme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39216/08]
[686]Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): As the Deputy will be aware, I have responsibility for the National Childcare Investment Programme 2006 -2010 (NCIP), which was launched in 2006 with a total allocation of €575 million of which €358 was in respect of capital grant aid for childcare services.
Approximately €216 million of the programme’s remaining capital allocation was expected to be allocated during the 2009 and 2010, the final years of the programme as originally proposed. In line with the recently announced budgetary changes and their impact on capital expenditure under the National Development Programme 2007-2013, it is understood that the NCIP’s remaining capital allocation is being rescheduled to coincide with the full term of the NDP. In 2009, a capital allocation of €60 million is expected to be made. Given the length of time which it can take for many large-scale capital childcare projects to develop from the initial project stage to contract and drawdown of funding, this approach is expected to facilitate applicants and maximise programme spending. The NCIP’s current funding allocation in 2009 has been maintained at its 2008 level, that is a total of €73.578 million.
248. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding a hospital appointment in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39219/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
249. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) in County Kildare has had their doctor’s only medical card removed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39220/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Health Service Executive has the operational and funding responsibility for the GP visit card benefit, it is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has therefore requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to address this matter and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
250. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Health and Children if the external review into the procedure of symphysiotomy in some Irish hospitals (details supplied) is complete; if not, when it is expected to be complete; the person who is conducting this external review; when they were appointed; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39261/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): My predecessor, Minister Martin, met with the Survivors of Symphysiotomy (SOS) Group in late 2003 and agreed that a range of measures would be put in place to support the Group. I subsequently met with the Chairperson of the SOS Group in early 2007 who expressed satisfaction with regard to the progress made in this regard.
[687]Regarding the matter of a review, I understand that Minister Martin had been exploring the idea of engaging an expert from abroad to advise on the practice of symphysiotomy and that it did not prove possible to source such a person who would be acceptable to the various interests.
The Health Service Executive will continue to monitor and oversee the provision of necessary support services for this patient group.
251. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Health and Children when it is planned to open the new hospice unit at St. Ita’s Hospital, Newcastle West, County Limerick. [39262/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular matter raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
252. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children if, with regard to over-70 year old medical card holders whose entitlement will continue to be valid after 1 January 2009 because their income is under the new thresholds, such persons will be expected to undergo a means test once their card expires; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39263/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I can confirm that persons aged 70 and over, who currently hold a medical card and whose income is under the new weekly income thresholds of €700 for a single person and €1,400 for a couple, effective from 1st January 2009, will not have to undergo a means test. However, should their circumstances change to a point where their weekly income would be in excess of the thresholds, they should at that time notify the change of circumstances to the Health Service Executive.
253. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will be called for a scan in relation to their medical problem. [39265/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall Vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
254. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Health and Children the status of the appeal to the nursing home repayment scheme for a person (details supplied) in County Wexford; the efforts being made to reduce the waiting time for appeals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39290/08]
[688]Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Health Repayment Scheme Appeals Office is an independent office established to provide an appeals service to those who wish to appeal the decision of the Scheme Administrator under the Health (Repayment Scheme) Act 2006.
The claimant referred to by the Deputy lodged an appeal form with the Health Repayment Scheme Appeals Office on 14 April 2008 and lodged an oral hearing form on 29 April 2008. The appeal is currently being investigated and an oral hearing will be arranged for the claimant as soon as is practicable. When the appeals officer has made a determination on this appeal he/she will write to the claimant and will provide the claimant with the reasons for the decision.
On establishment of the Health Repayment Scheme Appeals Office in December 2006 four administrative staff and an officer to determine appeals were assigned to the office. A second appeals officer was appointed on 1 September 2008 to ensure that all appeals are processed as quickly as possible.
255. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will support the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 5. [39296/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): I understand from the Health Service Executive that on the 31st October 2008 two Principal Social Workers from St Michael’s House made a home visit to the individual (details supplied) where a day service was offered and accepted.
256. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) will be seen by an orthodontist; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39297/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the funding, management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
257. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will provide an estimate of the cost of legal services which her Department paid for in 2007 and to date in 2008; and if she is satisfied that effective measures are in place to minimise this cost. [39313/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The information requested is being collated in my Department and will be forwarded directly to the Deputy as soon as possible.
258. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding the renal unit capacity at a hospital (details supplied) in County Offaly; if all stations in same unit have been opened; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39319/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004 and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider [689]the particular issues raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matters investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
259. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children her policy in relation to married couples in which one spouse is aged over 70 years and the other aged under 70 years; if the spouse under 70 years is subject to a means test; the number of people in receipt of a medical card on this basis over the past five years; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39323/08]
260. Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children the number, in relation to the revised arrangements for the over-70s medical card, of spouses her Department anticipate will be eligible for a medical card on the basis that their partner is over 70 years of age and they satisfy the means test; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39324/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 259 and 260 together.
At present, when a person aged 70 and over has a spouse aged under 70, the spouse will qualify for a medical card following a means test, if the couple’s combined income is within the means thresholds of €596.50 (net) or €627.00 (net) depending on whether the over 70 medical card holder is aged 70-79 or 80 years or over respectively.
The Government recently announced the introduction of new income thresholds for entitlement to a medical card for those aged 70 and over of €700 (gross) per week for a single person and €1,400 (gross) for a couple with effect from 1st January 2009. The Government also announced that in cases where one member of a couple is aged 70 or over and the spouse is under 70, both will qualify for a medical card if their combined income is less than €1,400 (gross) per week.
The information sought by the Deputy in relation to the number of under 70 spouses over the last five years who qualified for a medical card based on the over 70 and over 80 married couple thresholds is not readily available to my Department or to the Health Service Executive (HSE), because primarily in such cases, the person aged 70 or over and their under 70 spouse received individual medical cards and were recorded separately on the HSE database.
Consequently, it is difficult to estimate, with absolute accuracy, the number of spouses under 70 years of age and married to a person aged 70 and over who will qualify for a medical card based on the new combined weekly income threshold of €1,400 applicable after 1st January 2009. However, given that the current weekly income thresholds for such spouses are net figures and the new increased combined threshold applicable after 1st January 2009 is a gross figure, it is not expected that the number of spouses who qualify for a medical card at present will vary significantly under the new arrangements.
In cases where a person aged 70 or over and their under 70 spouse hold medical cards under the existing arrangements but would not qualify under the new arrangements, the HSE may consider allocating a medical card on a discretionary basis if it considers they would otherwise be caused undue hardship in providing general medical and surgical services for themselves.
261. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will support the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 5. [39334/08]
[690]Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular matter raised by the Deputy. The Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
262. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she will take in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 5; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39346/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Government recently announced the introduction of new income thresholds for entitlement to a medical card for those aged 70 and over of €700 (gross) per week for a single person and €1400 (gross) per week for a couple with effect from 1st January, 2009. Where a person’s means are in excess of the income thresholds, the Health Service Executive may issue a medical card on a discretionary basis, if the applicant would otherwise be caused undue hardship in providing general medical and surgical services for himself/herself and any dependants.
263. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on a letter (details supplied); if, under the circumstances outlined, provision will be made for additional speech and language hours for the person concerned; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39350/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004 and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular issue raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
264. Deputy Andrew Doyle asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of palliative care nurses employed in County Wicklow; and the action being taken to ensure the employment of specialised nurses for the provision of palliative care nursing services in County Wicklow as soon as possible. [39356/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act, 2004. It is a matter for the Executive to manage and deploy its human resources to best meet the requirements of its Annual Service Plan for the delivery of health and personal social services to the public. The Executive is the appropriate body to consider the matter raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
[691]265. Deputy Andrew Doyle asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of occupational therapists employed in County Wicklow; the action being taken to employ occupational therapists to provide an occupational therapy service in County Wicklow; and the terms of employment and the means used to advertise vacancies. [39357/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Almost 130,000 people work full-time or part-time in our public health services. In recent years, the Government’s ongoing high level of investment in health has achieved and maintained significant increases in the numbers of doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals employed in the public health services. The Government has also invested heavily in the education and training of such personnel in order to secure a good supply of graduates to provide for the healthcare needs of the population into the future.
In view of this significant investment, the Government is committed to ensuring continued adequate recruitment of professional staff across a range of community settings to ensure the continued development of community services. Additional funding of €20 million has been provided in 2009 for health and education services for children with special educational needs. This funding will provide a total of 125 additional therapy posts in the HSE targeted at children of school-going age. 90 of these will be in the disability services, including speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, and physiotherapists. 35 additional posts will be provided for child and adolescent mental health services, including clinical psychologists, occupational therapists, and speech and language therapists for new and existing multidisciplinary teams.
In addition, certain key health and social care professional posts, including speech and language therapists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, clinical psychologists, counsellors and social workers, are to be protected by setting employment floors for these grades within the Health Service Executive (HSE) in 2009. These posts are essential to the development of a number of services areas such as disability (including speech and language therapy), child adolescent mental health services and child protection services. In order to protect these posts, my Department will be writing to the HSE setting out the minimum employment levels to be maintained within each of these occupations in the health sector in 2009. The recruitment and retention of these key front line professional posts is vital to ensure continued progress in the development of community settings.
Subject to overall parameters set by Government, the Health Service Executive has the responsibility for determining the composition of its staffing complement. In that regard, it is a matter for the Executive to manage and deploy its human resources to best meet the requirements of its Annual Service Plan for the delivery of health and personal social services to the public. The Executive is the appropriate body to consider the matters raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matters investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
266. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Health and Children the net annual savings that will be made by the new system for over 70s medical cards in comparison with the old system, taking into account the new administrative costs associated with it; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39359/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Following the recent Government decision to withdraw automatic entitlement to a medical card for persons aged 70 and over and to raise the means assessment threshold for persons in that age cohort, it is estimated that approximately 5% (20,000) of persons aged 70 and over will no longer qualify for a medical [692]card. It is estimated that this will result in a saving of approximately €20 million in 2009, taking account of GP capitation fees, drug costs, superannuation costs, etc.
The Government appointed Mr. Eddie Sullivan to make recommendations on a new single annual capitation fee to be paid to general practitioners in respect of medical card holders aged 70 and over in the community. Mr. Sullivan recommended a single capitation fee of €290, which would come into effect, subject to the proposed legislative changes, from 1st January 2009. Mr. Sullivan’s recommendations were accepted by Government on 29th October 2009. Mr. Sullivan estimated that this would generate savings of the order of €16 million in 2009.
The Government believe that there is potential for significant savings of at least €64 million in drug costs under the GMS and community drug schemes, without compromising on patient care. Accordingly, it has decided to establish a process under the chairmanship of Dr. Michael Barry, to develop recommendations for good practice which will secure safe and effective prescribing for patients, while maximising the potential for the economy in the use of public funds. The initial report from Dr. Barry will be prepared by 1st December 2008.
The Health Service Executive has indicated that, through the streamlining of its application processes and the restructuring of existing organisational capacity and resources to manage the implementation of this government measure, it does not envisage any significant additional administrative costs.
267. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount of funding allocated to a centre (details supplied) in Dublin 16 in 2008; if the Health Service Executive funding for this centre has been reduced; if funding of medical cards for recovering addicts attending this centre has been reduced; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39438/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
268. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of orthodontists currently working in the Health Service Executive; the number working in the Dun Laoghaire area; if positions are vacant; the plans in place to fill them; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39466/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the funding, management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
269. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Health and Children if her attention has been drawn to the fact that there is a 20-month waiting list for the adult audiology service in Wexford; if she has had discussions with the Health Service Executive in relation to improv[693]ing this service; if funding dedicated to substantially reducing this waiting period will be provided to the HSE by her Department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39467/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the funding, management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
270. Deputy Jimmy Deenihan asked the Minister for Health and Children if the dental treatment services scheme for medical card holders is in full operation here; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39470/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the funding, management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
271. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Health and Children if the delays in refunding patients under the drugs payment scheme will be expedited by invoking the Prompt Payment of Accounts Act in order that they are not left waiting for long periods in having refunds made; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39498/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Prompt Payment of Accounts Act 1997 requires all public bodies to pay amounts due to suppliers of goods and services promptly. Accordingly, I do not consider that the Act is relevant in this context.
Following the reduction in pharmaceutical reimbursement prices on 1 March 2008, claims made by patients to Health Service Executive (HSE) local health offices were paid at the new lower reimbursement rate. I understand that payment of some claims was delayed because the pharmacy had charged the patient at the higher price, not the lower reimbursement price. Following a recent High Court judgment, reimbursement prices are being reinstated to the original level. Consequently, the HSE is now examining the issue of refund of payments to patients through local health offices. It is expected that this matter will be resolved shortly.
272. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of capital projects which have gone over budget in each of the past five years; the original estimate for each of these projects; the final cost of same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39527/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Since its establishment in 2005, the Health Service Executive has had responsibility for public health sector capital developments other than those projects undertaken by my Department, by the Office of the Minister for Children and by the health agencies that are directly funded by my Department. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to [694]arrange to have the details requested in relation to those projects for which the Executive has responsibility, issued directly to the Deputy.
My Department is collating the requested details in relation to the remaining capital projects and will reply directly to the Deputy.
273. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Health and Children the severance packages for each retiring staff member in her Department over the past three years; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39542/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Severance provisions for staff are available in limited circumstances, and involve termination of employment for Ministerial personal staff on cessation of office of the Minister or a Minister of State. Severance is not payable to Ministerial personal staff who have been appointed by way of secondment from the civil service or some other form of leave of absence from other employments. As such, severance provisions apply only where Ministerial personal staff have no job to return to on cessation of office of the Minister or Minister of State. In accordance with Department of Finance guidelines severance payments of either 2 month’s pay, or 4 weeks’ pay per year of service apply depending on which is more favourable. These severance payments are in addition to any statutory entitlements under the Redundancy Payments Acts and the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts.
Over the past three years my Department has made severance payments in respect of seven Ministerial personal staff to a total value of €99,682. These ranged from a maximum payment of €24,927 to a minimum of €8,359 and an overall average of €14,240. Civil servants, on retirement, receive an entitlement under existing superannuation schemes which are not considered as severance packages.
274. Deputy Mary O’Rourke asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will review the case of persons (details supplied) in County Westmeath. [39565/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. The Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
275. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Health and Children the position in relation to provision of a home care package for a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39579/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. The Depart[695]ment has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
276. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will respond to correspondence from a person (details supplied). [39592/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): At present there is no legislation in Ireland governing the intervention in the natural process of creating human life; instead, medical practice is governed by guidelines issued by the Medical Council. My Department is developing an appropriate regulatory framework for the area of Assisted Human Reproduction, which will also encompass the area of human embryonic stem cell research. This work involves, inter alia, examining the approaches to regulation in other jurisdictions and considering the ethical and legal issues that arise. It will also take into account the report of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children on this area — when completed — and any judgment of the Supreme Court in the RvR (frozen embryo) case. In the meantime, I understand from the Health Research Board that funding of almost €3 million has been awarded by the board for various projects in Ireland on research involving other types of stem cells.
277. Deputy Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on queries (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter relating to the provision of mental health services in budget 2009. [39593/08]
282. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will allocate the promised €25 million for mental health services in order to achieve the goals of A Vision for Change; if she will put in place adequate mechanisms to ensure that it is spent accountably; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39614/08]
283. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Health and Children the steps taken by her to implement recommendation 19.11 of A Vision for Change; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39615/08]
289. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount she will allocate the mental health services in accordance with the provisions as set out in A Vision for Change; the mechanisms put in place to ensure accountability in spending of these funds; the steps she has taken to implement recommendation 19.11 of A Vision for Change; and the action to date taken by her on the recommendations issued by the sub-committee on the adverse side effects of pharmaceuticals. [39700/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 277, 282, 283 and 289 together.
Substantial resources have been invested in mental health services. Overall spending on mental health services in 2007 amounted to €1 billion and this level of funding continued into 2008. It is also important to bear in mind that some 90% of mental health problems are dealt with in primary care.
The estimated additional cost of the implementation of ‘A Vision for Change’ the Report of the Expert Group on Mental Health Policy is €150m over 7 — 10 years. A total of €51.2 million has been allocated since 2006 which represents over a third of the overall requirement. Under the Health Act 2004, the Health Service Executive is obliged to operate within its overall vote. [696] In this regard, it took steps to ensure that it met this objective in 2007 by delaying some of its planned developments, including developments in mental health. I am advised that of the €51 million provided in 2006 and 2007 for the implementation of ‘A Vision for Change’, about €30 million has now been invested. In addition, the recruitment of 8 additional child and adolescent teams and the commissioning of 14 additional beds for children and adolescents is underway.
I wish to assure the Deputies that this Government is firmly committed to the development of mental health services in line with ‘A Vision for Change’. Implementation of the recommendations of the Report is a key priority for the Office for Disability and Mental Health. By working in partnership with the HSE to achieve the agreed targets, the Office is bringing a new impetus to implementation. Funding will be provided in 2009 for the recruitment of 35 therapy posts for the child and adolescent mental health service. In addition, once-off funding of €1.75m is being provided for suicide prevention initiatives and for mental health projects supporting service users and carers. I also wish to point out that implementation of ‘A Vision for Change’ is dependent to a much greater extent on the remodelling of existing resources than on new additional funds.
Implementation of many of the recommendations in 19.11 of ‘A Vision for Change’ is the responsibility of the HSE. In relation to research the Department of Health and Children provides funding to the Mental Health Research Unit (MHRU) as part of the Health Research Board’s overall allocation. The Unit manages and reports on national information systems in the mental health area e.g. the National Psychiatric In–Patient Reporting System (NPIRS). Support has been provided to develop WISDOM — a system which will capture information on inpatient and community care service activity. Research is also an integral part of the work of the Health Service Executive and the Mental Health Commission.
In relation to the Report on the Adverse Side Effects of Pharmaceuticals, April 2007, I am advised that the Irish Medicines Board (IMB) initiated a process to carefully examine the various items raised. This assessment was completed in November 2007. The outcomes of this assessment have been communicated to my Department and I am advised that proposals concerning conduct of clinical trials and post authorisation studies are already provided for in legislation and are the subject of a range of initiatives.
Regarding the handling of Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) reporting, a number of items highlighted in the Oireachtas report reflected submissions made by the IMB and the consultant’s assessment drew attention to the following opportunities which are currently being progressed by the IMB:
further development of stakeholder education strategy to include safety issues across the organisation,
expanding the current IMB adverse reaction education and awareness programme to a wider healthcare professional base, members of the public and to enhance the profile of the topic in the media,
targeted campaign focused on improving awareness of adverse reaction reporting among health professionals and the public,
the publication of high level adverse reaction data.
I am also advised that the IMB has developed a website which has the capacity to take on-line reporting of adverse reaction reports. This system is fully operational and reports are being taken from both health care professionals and patients. The website can be accessed at; [697]http://www.imb.ie/EN/Safety--Quality/Online-Forms/Human-Medicine-Adverse-Drug-Reaction.aspx
The position in relation to the establishment of a Patient Safety Agency is that a Commission on Patient Safety and Quality Assurance was established to develop clear and practical recommendations to ensure that quality and safety of care for patients is paramount within the healthcare system. The Commission’s Report —‘Building a Culture of Patient Safety’ was published on 7th August 2008. It contains 134 recommendations spanning across almost every area of the health service including a number relating to the reporting, managing and learning from adverse events in the health system generally as well as some recommendations in the area of medication safety relating chiefly to the Irish Medicines Board and other bodies with a stake in the medication sector.
The implementation plan endorsed by the Commission recommends the immediate establishment of an Implementation Steering Group (ISG) and five expert subgroups relating to specific subjects. The advantages of this model are that it immediately builds on the structures already in place and can deliver results quickly. On this basis, the establishment of a new patient safety agency is not proposed.
278. Deputy Seán Ardagh asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will confirm that after January 2009, once a medical card is legitimately received by a person over 70, that card will not be taken away in the future as in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 6W; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39595/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Health Service Executive has the operational and funding responsibility for the medical card benefit, it is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has therefore requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to address this matter and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
279. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will be given an appointment in Galway with a neurologist in view of the fact that their referral was submitted several months ago. [39604/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall Vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
280. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Health and Children the steps that have been taken by her Department to replace a speech and language therapist providing services at a school (details supplied) in County Offaly; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39605/08]
[698]281. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Health and Children when a replacement speech and language therapist will be put in place for a school (details supplied) in County Offaly; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39606/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 280 and 281 together.
Almost 130,000 people work full-time or part-time in our public health services. In recent years, the Government’s ongoing high level of investment in health has achieved and maintained significant increases in the numbers of doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals employed in the public health services. The Government has also invested heavily in the education and training of such personnel in order to secure a good supply of graduates to provide for the healthcare needs of the population into the future.
In view of this significant investment, the Government is committed to ensuring continued adequate recruitment of professional staff across a range of community settings to ensure the continued development of community services. Additional funding of €20 million has been provided in 2009 for health and education services for children with special educational needs. This funding will provide a total of 125 additional therapy posts in the HSE targeted at children of school-going age. 90 of these will be in the disability services, including speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, and physiotherapists. 35 additional posts will be provided for child and adolescent mental health services, including clinical psychologists, occupational therapists, and speech and language therapists for new and existing multi-disciplinary teams.
In addition, certain key health and social care professional posts, including speech and language therapists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, clinical psychologists, counsellors and social workers, are to be protected by setting employment floors for these grades within the Health Service Executive (HSE) in 2009. These posts are essential to the development of a number of services areas such as disability (including speech and language therapy), child adolescent mental health services and child protection services. In order to protect these posts, my Department will be writing to the HSE setting out the minimum employment levels to be maintained within each of these occupations in the health sector in 2009. The recruitment and retention of these key front line professional posts is vital to ensure continued progress in the development of community settings.
Subject to overall parameters set by Government, the Health Service Executive has the responsibility for determining the composition of its staffing complement. In that regard, it is a matter for the Executive to manage and deploy its human resources to best meet the requirements of its Annual Service Plan for the delivery of health and personal social services to the public. The Executive is the appropriate body to consider the matters raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matters investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Questions Nos. 282 and 283 answered with Question No. 277.
284. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Health and Children the action she has taken or will take on the recommendations issued by the Sub-Committee on the Adverse Side Effects of Pharmaceuticals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39616/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Following the publication by a Sub-Committee of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children of its Report on the Adverse Side Effects of Pharmaceuticals in April 2007, the Irish Medicines Board (IMB) [699]initiated a process to carefully examine the various items raised. This process involved the appointment of independent external consultants and experts in the field of pharmacovigilance and drug safety who have conducted a robust assessment of the proposals. This assessment was completed in November 2007.
I am advised that the proposals concerning conduct of clinical trials and post authorisation studies are already provided for in legislation and are the subject of a range of initiatives. One such initiative is a European Medicines Agency project to establish a European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) to look at ways of establishing studies in the various member states and enhancing the sharing of study data across the EU. The IMB’s intensive involvement with the Agency and European medicines regulation ensures our full engagement with this initiative and access to all resultant patient safety information.
Regarding of Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) reporting, a number of items highlighted in the Sub-Committee’s report reflected submissions made by the IMB and the consultant’s assessment drew attention to the following opportunities which are currently being progressed by the IMB:
further development of stakeholder education strategy to include safety issues across the organisation,
expanding the current IMB adverse reaction education and awareness programme to a wider healthcare professional base, members of the public and to enhance the profile of the topic in the media,
targeted campaign focussed on improving awareness of adverse reaction reporting among health professionals and the public,
the publication of high level adverse reaction data.
The Sub-Committee’s report referred to the need to increase the reporting of ADRs. In response to this, the IMB has developed a website which has the capacity to take on-line reporting of adverse reaction reports. This system has been fully operational in 2008 and reports are being taken from both health care professionals and patients. The website can be accessed at; http://www.imb.ie/EN/Safety--Quality/Online-Forms/Human-Medicine-Adverse-Drug-Reaction.aspx
With regard to the establishment of a patient safety agency as recommended by the Sub-Committee, in January 2007, I established a Commission on Patient Safety and Quality Assurance to develop clear and practical recommendations to ensure that quality and safety of care for patients is paramount within the healthcare system.
The Commission’s Report —‘Building a Culture of Patient Safety’ was published on 7th August 2008. The report contains 134 recommendations spanning across almost every area of the health service including a number relating to the reporting, managing and learning from adverse events in the health system generally. It also made recommendations in the area of medication safety which are being addressed by the Irish Medicines Board and other bodies with a stake in the medication sector.
I will be submitting proposals to Government in the near future arising from the report of the Commission.
285. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Health and Children the details of the [700]development works undertaken by her Department under Section 181 (2) (a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39650/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): My Department has not undertaken any development works under Section 181 (2) (a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 since the Act was enacted.
286. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children the level of funding allocated to a service provider (details supplied) in 2007; and the breakdown of this budget. [39657/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Question No. 287 answered with Question No. 243.
288. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding the proposed community hospital for Tuam, County Galway; the number of expressions of interest that were received; if all such expression of interest applicants will be involved in the dialogue stage; the length of time this phase will take; if the €15 million Government funds already allocated to this project are still available; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39678/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular matter raised by the Deputy. The Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Question No. 289 answered with Question No. 277.
290. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Health and Children the position with regard to the introduction of a medical card for all full-time carers regardless of means; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39701/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): At present, medical cards are granted primarily on the basis of means and individual circumstances. Under the Health Act, 2004, determination of eligibility for medical cards is the responsibility of the Health Service Executive. The HSE has discretion, in cases of exceptional need, to provide assistance to individuals where undue hardship would otherwise be caused. I have no plans to provide for the granting of medical cards to any particular group as a whole.
[701]Medical cards are made available to persons and their dependants who would otherwise experience undue hardship in meeting the cost of general practitioner services. In 2005, the GP visit card was introduced as a graduated benefit so that people on lower incomes who do not qualify for a medical card would not be deterred on cost grounds from visiting their GP. In June 2006, I agreed with the HSE to raise the assessment guidelines for GP visit cards and these are now 50% higher than those in respect of medical cards. For medical card and GP visit card applications, the HSE now considers an applicant’s income after tax and PRSI are deducted, rather than total income. Allowances are also made for expenses on childcare, rent and mortgage costs and the cost of travel to work.
291. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of staff, employed and on contract, in the personal office of the chief executive officer of the Health Service Executive; the annual cost of such office in 2007; and the estimated cost for 2008. [39707/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Subject to overall parameters set by Government, the Health Service Executive has the responsibility for determining the composition of its staffing complement. In that regard, it is a matter for the Executive to manage and deploy its human resources to best meet the requirements of its Annual Service Plan for the delivery of health and personal social services to the public. The Executive is the appropriate body to consider the matter raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
292. Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) in County Cork is paying €350 per week out of their limited income for the maintenance of their spouse in a nursing home; and if the Health Service Executive will increase the level of subvention in order to reduce the person’s liabilities which are causing severe financial hardship to them. [39715/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular matter raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
293. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of referrals from a group (details supplied) in Dublin 7, to the Mater Hospital accident and emergency department, in each month since January to date in 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39717/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004 and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular issue raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary [702]Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matters investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
294. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children the position in relation to the provision of home help for a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [39725/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. The Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
295. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Health and Children if, in the interest of reducing paper use, her Department has plans to relax or drop the requirement to supply three or more hard copies of tender documentation and to move towards greater use of electronic documentation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39738/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy will be aware, public procurement rules do not specify the number of copies of tender documents to be submitted and they permit contracting authorities to require the submission of tenders solely by electronic means. The e-tenders website provides this facility and this was utilised in a recent competition carried out by my Department. My Department is committed to increasing the use of electronic tender documentation where possible.
296. Deputy Charlie O’Connor asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regarding issues raised between her Department, the Health Service Executive and the Irish Pharmacy Union; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39745/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Health Service Executive, with the support of my Department, agreed with the Irish Pharmacy Union on 28th April 2008 to address a number of matters including engagement on a new substantive contract and payment of outstanding general round increases. Progress has been made in relation to the general round increases. Engagement on a new contract was deferred pending the judgment of the Commercial Court in a case relating to wholesale reimbursement pricing. Now that the Court has delivered its judgment, I intend to initiate a process of engagement with the IPU at an early date.
297. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will confirm that the radiology department in the Louth Meath hospital group is sufficiently resourced with consultant radiologists to ensure that significant misdiagnosis of X-rays is no longer occurring; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39762/08]
[703]298. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will confirm that no concerns in relation to the number of radiologists employed in the Louth Meath group have been brought to the attention of the Health Service Executive; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39763/08]
299. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will confirm that no concerns in relation to significant misdiagnosis of X-rays in the Louth Meath hospital group have been expressed to the Health Service Executive since the locum consultant involved in the recent review of chest X-rays left the region; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39764/08]
300. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if the radiology department in the Louth Meath group is dependent on locums including external radiologists employed by the Health Service Executive, to report on X-rays due to the workload in the department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39765/08]
301. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if the Health Service Executive has been informed by the consultant radiologists in the Louth Meath radiology department that they are experiencing difficulty in coping with the workload in the three hospitals in the group; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39766/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 297 to 301, inclusive, together.
The Health Service Executive recently published the Report of the Review of Chest X-Rays and CT Scans reported by a locum consultant radiologist at Louth/Meath Hospitals from August 2006 to August 2007. The Review found that nine patients in Drogheda and Navan hospitals had their diagnosis of lung cancer delayed as a result of radiological missed diagnosis. Eight of these patients are deceased. I have extended my sympathies to the families of these patients. The 9 patients had been identified and diagnosed prior to March 2008. The review did not therefore find any other delayed diagnosis of lung cancers.
My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the specific issues raised by the Deputy investigated and to have a reply issued directly to him.
302. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children if she or the Health Service Executive are taking action on the constant consultant representations regarding the inability of the Lourdes Hospital to cope safely with the number of patients on trolleys such as on 3 November 2008 when there were 34 patients on trolleys in the hospital; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39767/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I am aware that there has been increased pressure on the Emergency Department of Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda recently. The Health Service Executive (HSE) has been working to put in place a range of measures to alleviate these pressures. At hospital level some planned activity has been re-scheduled and there has been a particular focus on improving the discharge planning process for patients whose acute phase of care has been completed. In addition, a new Emergency Department is scheduled to open next year.
My Department has asked the HSE to issue a more detailed reply to the Deputy setting out the various measures that are being implemented at the Hospital.
303. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will introduce a health warning on alcoholic products; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39773/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Mary Wallace): My Department is developing proposals on the labelling of all alcohol containers advising of the risks of consuming alcohol during pregnancy. The labelling of foodstuffs, including alcohol products, is subject to European regulation and scrutiny so the proposals will have to take this into account.
304. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of community drug prevention workers employed in each of the Health Service Executive areas; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39774/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
305. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children the public transport services used by her since she came into office or since 2007 on official business; the destinations travelled to; the cost of same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39797/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Since 2007, my Department paid a total of €3,353 in respect of my air travel. No payments were made by my Department in respect of my travel by bus or rail. In October 2006, I travelled to Chicago to visit a paediatric hospital. The cost of the air travel was €3,139. In September 2008 I travelled from Paris where I attended the EU Council of Ministers informal meeting. The cost of the air travel was €214.
306. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children the public transport services used by her officials since 2007 on official business; the cost of same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39825/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The information requested is being collated in my Department and will be forwarded directly to the Deputy as soon as possible.
307. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Health and Children when appointments will be made for women who have been referred by their general practitioners to Dochas Centre, Drogheda and Beaumont Hospital Breast Clinic for consultation; the reason no one has been designated to arrange appointments for many of these women; her views on whether no transfer of services from Dochas Centre to Beaumont Breast Clinic should take place until proper arrangements are in place; her views on the stress which these women are undergoing as they wait, for many weeks in some cases, for appointments; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39829/08]
[705]Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Staff at Beaumont Hospital and Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda have been working closely together over the past two months to ensure that the transition of symptomatic breast cancer services operates safely and without any disruption of service. A final date for the completion of the transition of the service has not been set as all of the radiology resources are not yet in place on the Beaumont site. A management team consisting of staff from both hospitals and the National Cancer Control Programme will continue to oversee transitional arrangements until the completion of the service transfer.
In the interim, GPs in the Drogheda region have been asked to continue to refer to Drogheda where all referrals are prioritised based on clinical need according to existing practice. Patients will be given appointments to be seen in either Beaumont or Drogheda. The surgical teams at Beaumont and Drogheda, working as a combined team, will ensure that all patients are appropriately prioritised and seen in a timely manner.
308. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Health and Children if the investigation into the delay in publishing the McCoy report has been completed; and the reason for the delay in publishing the report relating to the investigation originally due to be completed by 8 July 2008, the deadline for which was extended to 31 October 2008. [39868/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): As the Deputy is aware, Minister Harney appointed Mr John Hynes, former Secretary General, Department of Social and Family Affairs, to investigate the delay of eight years in relation to the publication of the McCoy report into services provided by the Brothers of Charity, Galway Services.
Mr. Hynes’s Report was received in the Department on 30 October 2008. It is currently under consideration.
309. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount of money paid to private companies and individuals to look after children in the care of the Health Service Executive in 2008; the rate paid per week for each child cared for in this way; the parts of the country in which such private care is used; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39873/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and social services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
310. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on adding the condition lupus to the long term illness scheme in view of the nature of the condition which is consistent with the purpose of the scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39914/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Under the 1970 Health Act, the Health Service Executive may arrange for the supply, without charge, of drugs, medicines and [706]medical and surgical appliances to people with a specified condition, for the treatment of that condition, through the Long Term Illness Scheme (LTI). The LTI does not cover GP fees or hospital co-payments. The conditions are: mental handicap, mental illness (for people under 16 only), phenylketonuria, cystic fibrosis, spina bifida, hydrocephalus, diabetes mellitus, diabetes insipidus, haemophilia, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophies, Parkinsonism, conditions arising from thalidomide and acute leukaemia. There are currently no plans to extend the list of eligible conditions.
311. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has plans to coordinate the ambulance services in the Dublin area which are operated under the Health Service Executive and Dublin City Council; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39915/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): For many years Dublin City Council, through Dublin Fire Brigade, has provided the emergency ambulance service in Dublin City on behalf of the statutory health authorities. The relevant authority since 2005 is the Health Service Executive. The HSE provides mainly the non-emergency patient transport in the Dublin area under the auspices of its National Ambulance Service.
I am committed to ensuring that ambulance services throughout the country are both safe and effective. The arrangements in the Dublin area have been in place for many years. There are potential benefits to be gained from a close alignment of ambulance and fire services, as occurs in Dublin. Equally, a case can be made for applying the model that operates in the rest of the country, where ambulance services are provided separately from the fire service.
Safety is, of course, the primary concern. For this reason, work is at present being undertaken by the health and local government sectors to consider the best long-term approach to the provision of emergency ambulance services in Dublin. This includes examination of the potential for improved efficiency in the delivery of these services, to ensure that the best value for money is obtained.
312. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children if her attention has been drawn to the delays in paying claims under the drugs refund scheme in the midwest; if she will take action to reduce the waiting time; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39916/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Following the reduction in pharmaceutical reimbursement prices on 1 March 2008, claims made by patients to Health Service Executive (HSE) local health offices were paid at the new lower reimbursement rate.
I understand that payment of some claims was delayed because the pharmacy had charged the patient at the higher price, not the lower reimbursement price.
Following a recent High Court judgment, reimbursement prices are being reinstated to the original level. Consequently, the HSE is now examining the issue of refund of payments to patients through local health offices. It is expected that this matter will be resolved shortly.
313. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has received [707]a letter from an organisation (details supplied); if she will address the issue raised in their letter regarding the National Centre for Medical Genetics whereby certain tests for people with genetic and rare disorders can no longer be provided; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39917/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I received correspondence from the Genetic and Inherited Disorders Organisation which was referred by my Department to the Health Service Executive for examination and direct reply. I understand that a reply issued to the Organisation from the Executive.
The National Centre for Medical Genetics seeks to provide a comprehensive service for all patients and families in the Republic of Ireland affected by or at risk of genetic disorder. The Centre is based at and funded by Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Crumlin and provides a service for both children and adults.
My Department has asked the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to reply directly to the Deputy on the other issues raised.
314. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Health and Children the cost to the Exchequer of subventions paid to persons in nursing homes in 2007; the estimated cost in 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39987/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): In 2007, expenditure by the HSE on nursing home subventions was almost €205 million. In the course of 2008, an additional €12 million was provided to meet costs associated with nursing home subventions and existing contract beds. On this basis, the HSE have advised that in excess of €200 million will be spent on nursing home subventions during 2008.
315. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of persons in private nursing homes who were in receipt of subventions in 2007; the number of same who were in receipt of enhanced subventions and of reduced subventions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [39988/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Máire Hoctor): According to the HSE’s annual report for 2007, there were 8,467 people in receipt of basic subvention at 31 December 2007. Of these, 4,982 were also in receipt of enhanced subvention.
316. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount the process of decentralisation has cost the taxpayer to date excluding the cost of all sites or buildings acquired; and the cost for each individual location. [40156/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As the Deputy will be aware my Department is not one of the Departments scheduled for decentralisation under the Government’s Decentralisation Programme.
317. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Transport his plans to change the Air [708]Navigation and Transport Acts as outlined in a newspaper article (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39191/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Attorney-General’s Office, in conjunction with relevant officials are examining the statutory powers available to the civil authorities and An Garda Síochána in relation to search and inspection of aircraft including under the Air Navigation and Transport Acts. That examination commenced recently and no conclusions have yet been reached on whether the current statutory provisions need to be strengthened or amended.
318. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Transport when he will take steps to fill the vacancies which exist on the board of the Cork Airport Authority; when he will appoint a chairperson of the Cork Airport Authority; the reason for the ongoing delay in making these appointments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39200/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): On 5 November I was very pleased to be able to appoint persons of the calibre of Mr. Gerry Walsh, as Chairman, and Mr. Dick Lehane and Ms. Annette McNamara to the board of the Cork Airport Authority. They each bring different skills and experience to the work of the board of the Cork Airport Authority and I am confident that all three will make very valuable contributions to the future of Cork Airport.
319. Deputy Ruairí Quinn asked the Minister for Transport if, in view of the downturn in the public finances, he will reconsider his decision to prohibit amending the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations to provide for the partial parking of vehicles on the footpath in congested residential districts in which such parking is currently illegal; if he will meet with representatives of Dublin City Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39245/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Transport (Deputy Noel Ahern): It is prohibited under the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations 1997 to park a vehicle wholly or partially on a public footpath or for a vehicle to be driven along a footpath. Dublin City Council has been in contact with my Department over recent years seeking that this parking regulation be amended. The City Council propose that the law should provide that a road authority may mark a line along the length of a public footpath and that vehicles be permitted to park with two wheels up on the footpath outside of the line marking.
The City Council was informed by the Department last August that, on road safety grounds, it is not proposed to amend the road traffic parking regulations to provide for the partial parking of vehicles on public footpaths. The Minister for Transport re-iterated that position in a letter to the City Council last month and suggested that at locations where sufficient width can be left for the safe passage of pedestrians, use of child buggies/prams and wheelchairs that the solution of indenting the footpath to provide an on-street parking area could be pursued instead.
The solution suggested by the Minister can be applied at any location that could adequately accommodate the footpath parking line measure that the City Council are seeking and it is not proposed to have a meeting on this matter.
[709]The mounting of footpath kerbs by vehicles to partially park on a public footpath and the opening of vehicle doors across the footpath are potentially safety hazards for pedestrians. Furthermore footpaths are not constructed to bear the weight of vehicles driving along them and the surface paving is liable to crack and to get into a poor state of repair with broken kerbs, uneven surfaces, damage to utility access covers and potential trip hazards for pedestrians. I do not support a change in road traffic law that could compromise and diminish the safety of pedestrians using a public footpath.
320. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Transport if he will support a matter (details supplied). [39293/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Government remains committed to the implementation of the Metro North project which is a critical element of the Transport 21 strategy to transform the public transport system in the Greater Dublin Area. The Metro was originally recommended in the Dublin Transportation Office’s long term transportation strategy A Platform for Change following detailed strategic analysis.
The project itself has been through a rigorous economic and transport evaluation undertaken by the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) in accordance with Guidelines for capital projects issued by the Department of Finance and which was independently assessed for the Department of Finance and the Oireachtas Transport Committee. I am satisfied that the economic and transport evaluation of Metro North has been in accordance with best practice for such a project.
An elevated railway within the constraints of the city centre would present significant difficulties. It would require a wide corridor of land to accommodate the viaduct and such a requirement would entail the demolition of a significant number of properties. There would be substantial construction impacts. In addition, an elevated rail system would also have an unacceptable visual impact and cause substantial visual intrusion in residential areas within the confines of the city centre and give rise to significant concerns about its environmental impact. It should be noted that outside of the city centre, where feasible and appropriate, Metro North will, subject to planning approval, run on elevated structures.
More fundamentally a decision now to opt for an elevated railway would result in the abandonment of the current statutory approval and PPP procurement processes and the start of entirely new planning, consultation, environmental impact assessment, railway order and procurement processes. The consequence of this would be an indefinite delay in the implementation of a public transport project which is urgently required.
The RPA placed copies of the Railway Order application on display on 17 September in accordance with the 6 week statutory public notice requirement pursuant to Section 37 of the Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Act 2001. It was open to interested parties to make submissions to An Bord in relation to the project during that period.
321. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide an estimate of the cost of legal services which his Department paid for in 2007 and to date in 2008; and if he is satisfied that effective measures are in place to minimise this cost. [39317/08]
[710]Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The estimated cost of legal services paid by my Department for 2007 was €1,436,161 and to date in 2008 is €628,092. The normal procurement rules were followed when engaging these services.
322. Deputy Leo Varadkar asked the Minister for Transport the implications of the decision announced in budget 2009 to amalgamate the Air Accident Investigation Unit, the Railway Accident Investigation Unit and the Marine Casualty Investigation Board; the date by which this is to be achieved; if it will require legislation; if so, the date by which this is to be published; the anticipated savings from this decision in 2008, 2009 and 2010; the breakdown of those savings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39327/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): My Department is at present preparing proposals for the implementation of the decision announced in Budget 2009 in relation to the amalgamation of accident investigation functions. I do not anticipate savings to arise immediately from this decision in 2008, but do expect that the amalgamation of the bodies will enable efficiencies to be achieved in future years. These will come from the integration of support functions. Legislation will be required and I expect this to be drafted in 2009.
323. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Transport if he has received and reviewed the new report into the capsizing and sinking of a boat (details supplied) by the Marine Casualty Investigation Board; his views on the report; if he will bring forward new measures or legislation in view of the conclusions of the MCIB’s investigation into this disaster; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39372/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Transport (Deputy Noel Ahern): I have recently received the report from the Marine Casualty Investigation Board (MCIB) referred to by the Deputy.
The Report relates to the capsizing and sinking of the fishing vessel “Dinish” about 170 miles south west of the Scilly Isles with the loss of three lives. Six crewmembers and the Skipper were rescued. I welcome the report and its recommendations. In relation to fishing vessel safety generally it is important to emphasise that a comprehensive regulatory framework for fishing vessels has already been introduced to ensure a higher level of safety. This is being achieved over time through an approach that separates the fleet into three categories.
The first is less than 15 metres in length, where a non-statutory Code of Practice is in operation, the other two are 15 to 24 metres and over 24 metres and in both cases there is now a statutory regime in place.
As I have indicated previously, fishing vessel safety must rely not only on the introduction of regulations but also on compliance with them by skippers, owners and crew. This in turn may require not only specific training but also an increasingly rigorous regime of enforcement.
324. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport the airstrips, airfields, aerodromes and airports in public and private ownership in the State that are permitted to receive international flights, including flights from Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39441/08]
[711]Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Immigration Act 2004 (Approved Ports) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 57/2004) made by my colleague the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform lists the ports and airports approved for entry into the State for the purposes of the Immigration Act, 2004. A schedule with a list of these airports is set out for the Deputy’s information.
325. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport if and the way privately owned airports outside the scope of the Irish Aviation Authority are monitored; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39443/08]
326. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Transport the number of Irish airports accepting international flights that are outside the scope of the Irish Aviation Authority; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39444/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I propose to take Questions Nos. 325 and 326 together.
Aerodromes in the State that are open to international commercial aircraft are licensed by the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) as public use aerodromes. These include the three state airports and the privately owned regional airports. In addition, the IAA licenses aerodromes for private use. A full list of all of the licensed aerodromes in the State is available on the IAA’s website: www.iaa.ie.
I am also informed by the IAA that there are military and private airstrips or airfields that are not licensed and therefore outside the scope of the IAA. Typically private airstrips/airfields would be restricted to private aircraft and the pilot is responsible for the safe conduct of flight in respect of such operations.
327. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Transport the number of capital projects which have gone over budget in each of the past five years; the original estimate for each of these projects; the final cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39531/08]
[712]Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I have said previously that I do not consider it prudent to release commercially sensitive information in relation to the cost of individual projects until (i) all public procurement processes related to the project have been complete and (ii) robust cost estimates are available in relation to the non-contract elements of the project.
However, I believe it is reasonable to provide relevant business case information and cost details once a project has successfully completed the statutory processes, all contracts have been awarded and the project is underway.
Accordingly the information sought by the Deputy will be compiled and forwarded in respect of projects completed in the last 5 years or currently underway.
Information on the lines requested insofar as local authority regional and local roads projects are concerned is not available in my Department.
328. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Transport the severance packages for each retiring staff member in his Department over the past three years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39546/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): Upon retirement, rather than a severance package, staff are entitled to the payment of a lump sum based on their number of years service up to a maximum of 40 years. In the period 2006 to 2008 a total of 38 staff of my Department have retired. This includes early, ill-health and preserved retirements.
The total amount paid in lump sums to staff retiring from my Department per year is as follows:
2006 (10 Officers): €644,439.76
2007 (15 Officers): €1,098,853.72
2008 (13 Officers to date): €629,387.52.
329. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Transport the extent to which the Government policy in relation to funding design and building of tunnels will be affected by any lessons learned; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39583/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I understand that there is ongoing engagement between the National Roads Authority, the Railway Procurement Agency and Iarnród Éireann in relation to the design and construction of transport tunnels, having regard to the experience gained on the Dublin Port Tunnel. The issue has also been considered by the Transport 21 Monitoring Group which oversees the implementation of the investment programme.
330. Deputy Mary O’Rourke asked the Minister for Transport if he envisages funding being made available to repair the Camlin Bridge, Clondra, County Longford in 2009 (details supplied). [39594/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The provision and improvement of regional and local roads, including bridges, in its area is a matter for Longford County Council to be funded from its own resources supplemented by State grants.
[713]A road grant of €80,000 was allocated to Longford County Council in 2008 for Camlin Bridge under the Specific Improvement Grant Scheme. My Department recently invited applications from road authorities for funding under that scheme in 2009. The proposals submitted by Longford County Council included an application for further grant aid for Camlin Bridge.
All applications received for funding in 2009 under the scheme will be considered by my Department, having regard to compliance with eligibility criteria, the need to prioritise projects, competing demands from other local authorities and the funds available for the scheme in 2009. The 2009 regional and local road grant allocations to local authorities will be announced early next year.
331. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Transport when essential funding will be made available for restoration work on the bridge over the Shannon connecting Clondra village to Tarmonberry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39625/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): As Minister for Transport, I have responsibility for overall policy and funding in relation to the national roads programme element of Transport 21. The implementation of individual national road projects is a matter for the National Roads Authority (NRA) under the Roads Act, 1993 in conjunction with the local authorities concerned.
332. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Transport the cost of the Luas extension to Cherrywood; when he will publish the cost benefit analysis of this public investment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39630/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The current estimated cost (excluding VAT) of the Luas extension to Cherrywood is €319m. The cost of delivering the project is being met by a combination of Exchequer funding, contributions from private developers and levy income under a scheme adopted by Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council pursuant to section 49 of the Planning and Development Act 2000.
The cost benefit analysis presented to the Public Inquiry by the RPA for this project is available on my Department’s T21 website (www.transport21.ie/publications/ freedomofinformation). Good progress is being made on the construction of this extension which is scheduled for completion by the end of 2010.
333. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Transport the details of the development works undertaken by his Department under section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39654/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): There have been no development works undertaken by my Department under Section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted.
334. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Transport the status and present timeline for metro north, the interconnector, metro west, Luas line F and Luas line BX; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39718/08]
[714]Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The start and completion dates of Transport 21 projects which have not yet commenced will be determined by the outcome of the statutory approval and procurement processes and the funding allocation available during the current difficult economic climate. The provision of increased capacity will be a key priority in determining public transport investment priorities in the period ahead. In that context Metro North and the DART Underground (also known as the Interconnector) are particularly important rail investments as they form a core part of the planned integrated public transport network for the Greater Dublin Area envisaged by Transport 21.
Good progress is being made in the delivery of Metro North and the DART Underground. The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) placed copies of the Railway Order application for Metro North on display on 17 September 2008 in accordance with the 6 week statutory public notice requirement pursuant to Section 37 of the Transport (Railway Infrastructure) Act 2001. The RPA continues to make good progress on the PPP tender process for Metro North. Receipt of tenders is now required by 6 February 2009.
In relation to the DART Underground Irish Rail continues to make good progress in planning and design on the project. The company plans to be in a position to submit an application for a Railway Order by the end of next year and will further progress work on the development of the project as a PPP.
Good progress is also being made in planning Metro West, Luas Line F and Luas Line Bx. The emerging preferred route for Metro West was announced by the RPA in July 2007. A further round of consultation is now underway to provide greater definition to certain elements of the route after which the RPA will proceed with the preparation of a Railway Order application.
On the 10th October 2008, the Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) published the emerging preferred route corridor for the Luas line to Lucan (Line F) following extensive public consultation. Having selected the route corridor, the RPA is now undertaking the next phase of consultation with key stakeholders which will feed into the detailed design of the line. Following completion of this work the RPA will submit a Railway Order application to An Bord Pleanála in respect of this line.
It will not be possible to fully construct Luas Line BX at the same time as construction of Metro North because of the traffic management implications which would arise in the city centre. The RPA is developing a construction strategy for Luas Line BX, in close co-operation with Dublin City Council, which includes use of Metro North construction sites and recognises the traffic management requirements of the city centre. The RPA is engaging with Dublin City Council on the basis of the contemporaneous delivery of Lines BX and D. In this regard it is the intention of the RPA to make a single Railway Order application for the combined Line BX/D to An Bord Pleanála in the latter part of next year.
335. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Transport if, in the interest of reducing paper use, his Department has plans to relax or drop the requirement to supply three or more hard copies of tender documentation and to move towards greater use of electronic documentation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39742/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): My Department has accepted tenders electronically for a number of tendering procedures through the national public procurement website www.etenders.gov.ie, known as etenders and I expect the level of usage to increase significantly over the coming year.
336. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Transport when he expects to publish the national cycling policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39784/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): It is my intention to publish the National Cycle Policy by the end of the current year.
337. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Transport if research has been conducted by his Department into a pay per use scheme for road users to replace car tax and VRT; his views on whether such a scheme is feasible here and if so, when; his further views on whether such a scheme could be operated on a revenue neutral basis, which also took social factors and emissions into account; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39786/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): My Department has not undertaken research of the type referred to. The issue was, however, raised for discussion in the public consultation document “2020 Vision — Sustainable Travel and Transport” which was published in February 2008 and is available at www.sustainabletravel.ie.
338. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Transport if he will report on the progress to date in progressing the extension to the US customs and border protection facility at Shannon Airport; if he expects these negotiations to be finalised during the term of the current US administration; when he expects legislation to come before the Houses of the Oireachtas in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39869/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): Significant progress continues to be made between Irish and US officials towards the conclusion of an Inter-Governmental Agreement between our two countries on the introduction of pre-clearance facilities at Dublin and Shannon Airports. I hope to be in a position to sign this agreement in the near future.
When the agreement is in place, work will then commence on drafting the necessary legislation which will be introduced as soon as possible. As I have stated previously it is my hope that the timing of construction of the new CBP facility at Shannon can be aligned with the passage of the legislation to the extent that it is practical and feasible to do so.
339. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Transport the amount the process of decentralisation has cost the taxpayer to date excluding the cost of all sites or buildings acquired; and the cost for each individual location. [40160/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The non-property costs to date incurred by my Department in connection with the move of the Road Safety Authority and my Department’s Road Haulage functions to Loughrea amounted to €84,191. While decentralisation of an additional 62 Road Safety Authority posts (which were not part of the original government decision) to Ballina was also achieved, the costs involved were been borne by the Authority itself.
340. Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when [716]a decision will be made on the application for family reunification on behalf of a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [39368/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that the son of the person in question was the subject of a Family Reunification application made in November 2006 and a decision issued in September 2008 granting him permission to remain.
I am further informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that no application for Family Reunification was received from the person in question in relation to her daughter.
341. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the airports designated with port of entry status; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39442/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The airports listed hereunder have been prescribed by order (SI 57 of 2004 Immigration Act 2004 (Approved Ports) Regulations) by the Minister of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to be approved ports for non-nationals arriving by air from outside the State pursuant to Section 6(2) and 20 of the Immigration Act 2004:
342. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the policy changes which have taken place or are proposed to take place as outlined in a newspaper article (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39192/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): As the Deputy will be aware there are a number of commitments in the Programme for Government related to extraordinary rendition.
Insofar as they fall within the responsibility of my Department there has been regular communication between me and my Department acting on my behalf with the Garda Commissioner relating to the implementation of the Programme’s commitment in relation to extraordinary rendition. The Garda Commissioner has assured me that he has sufficient resources to implement the commitment, that the commitment is being implemented and is kept under constant review so as to reflect best practice.
To that end the Gardaí remain ready to take whatever action is open to them under the law in relation to any allegations involving extraordinary rendition. While they have no role in [717]relation to the inspection of military aircraft (which enjoy sovereign immunity), they do have search powers in relation to aircraft where evidence is available which would enable such powers to be exercised in accordance with the law. In addition the Cabinet Committee on Aspects of International Human Rights is reviewing the statutory powers currently available to the civil and police authorities in this jurisdiction in relation to search and inspection of aircraft (including the Air Navigational and Transport Acts which as the Deputy will be aware, are not the responsibility of my Department). It is the case that the Gardaí have fully investigated a number of allegations of unlawful activity at Irish airports and files have been submitted to the Director of Public Prosecution in some of these cases, although no prosecution was directed. In the other cases no evidence to substantiate the allegations was disclosed.
I can also inform the Deputy that there is a comprehensive programme of relevant and appropriate human rights training in place within An Garda Síochána. In an effort to ensure continued compliance with the Programme for Government Commitment to the highest possible standards last July the Garda Commissioner requested the Deputy Commissioner, Operations, to again review the training and search regime in this area. It is expected that review, which is having specific regard to the terms of the Programme for Government commitment, will be finalised shortly.
343. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to develop and extend the juvenile diversion programme and the youth diversion projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39198/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Garda Juvenile Diversion Programme operates in accordance with Part 4 of the Children Act 2001, as amended, and under the general superintendence and control of the Garda Commissioner. The aim of the Diversion Programme is to deal with juveniles who offend, by way of administering a formal or informal caution, thus diverting the offender away from the courts and minimising the likelihood of further offending. The Diversion Programme embraces, whenever possible, the principles of restorative justice and, at all times, it pays the highest regard to the needs of the victims of juvenile offending. The Programme has proven to be highly successful in diverting young persons away from crime by offering guidance and support to juveniles and their families. The Deputy will be aware that it is the responsibility of the Garda Commissioner to decide on the prioritisation and allocation of resources within the force. The Commissioner has informed me that the number of Gardaí operating as Juvenile Liaison Officers on 30 September 2008 was 105. The Commissioner has approved the appointment of 7 additional Juvenile Liaison Officers per year from 2007- 2010.
The Garda Youth Diversion Projects, which are funded by the Irish Youth Justice Service, are a crime prevention initiative designed to engage with young people who have identified as being at risk of involvement in criminal or anti-social behaviour. There are currently 100 Garda Youth Diversion Projects operating in various locations throughout the country. Each project is managed by a multi-agency and community based committee, which is responsible for the strategic direction of the project. The existing projects are currently rolling out a package of measures, which are supported by the European Social Fund and which are intended to improve the long-term employability prospects of the project participants and enhance project child protection procedures. The planned expansion in the number of projects beyond the existing 100 is currently being assessed in the light of the changed economic climate and, in this context, the focus will be on ensuring the quality and effectiveness of the services provided. The Irish Youth Justice Service and the Garda Síochána are reviewing the effectiveness of the diversionary measures as set out under the National Youth Justice Strategy 2008-2010.
344. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the steps he is taking to progress the planned installation of a closed circuit television system on College Road, University College, Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39199/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Garda CCTV systems are operational in 11 towns and cities around the country, including Cork, and a major programme of expansion involving the implementation of CCTV systems in a further 14 locations is well underway.
Garda CCTV schemes are planned and implemented on the basis of the Garda Commissioner’s identified operational needs and priorities taking into account available resources. I am advised by the Garda Authorities that no decision has been taken regarding the extension of the Cork scheme to the College Road area.
345. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the cutbacks in funding in each of the services and projects established in the State and community sectors to combat substance abuse; the way the budget 2009 allocation compares with 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39221/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): As the Deputy will be aware, it is the Department of Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs which is the lead Government Department for our National Drugs Strategy.
Subsequently, the primary budget for projects established to combat substance abuse in the state including the funding for local and regional drug task force originated community based projects is provided from the drugs initiative subhead at that Department.
As the Deputy will appreciate, that budget is a matter which falls under the remit of my colleague, Minister of State John Curran.
In relation to funding provided by my Department for community based projects which tackle substance misuse I can advise the following.
The Department of Justice Equality & Law Reform through the Probation Service provides funding to 53 voluntary bodies to assist with the management of offenders in the community. These funded projects provide a range of services to offenders in local communities, including training and education, offender management programmes, residential accommodation, drug and alcohol abuse treatment programmes. The budget allocation for funded projects for 2008 is €19.393m which represents 36% of the overall probation service budget.
A Value for Money and Policy Review of Projects funded through the Probation Service was completed in 2008 and published on the Department’s website on 2 September.
In dealing with offending behaviour, the Probation Service has developed a partnership approach over many years within communities whereby local links and projects are established to meet identified needs for a cohort of offenders, ex-offenders or persons engaged with the Service in those communities.
The review was commissioned to examine the projects in terms of their impact, effectiveness and value for money. The report pointed out that the objectives of many projects have not always been clearly stated and aligned with Probation policy and that the focus has frequently been on inputs rather than outputs.
[719]It recommended that in future it should be made clear what is expected of such projects and the focus should be on monitoring and evaluating the service to be delivered.
Following the VFM and Policy Review a funding agreement was introduced to keep the outputs of the community based organisations in line with the Strategy and workplans of the Probation Service and sets out the conditions and requirements attached to the provision of funding by the Department through the Probation Service to a community based organisation for the provision of services in the years ahead.
The funding agreement establishes that funding is provided in accordance with the Probation Service strategic objective to reduce the level of crime and to increase public safety by working with offenders to change behaviour.
The Minister for Justice, Equality & Law Reform is empowered to provide financial assistance to the work of a relevant body through the Probation Service.
A final decision on the allocation of funding to community based projects working with the Probation Service for 2009 has not been completed and, accordingly comparisons with 2008 funding levels are not yet available.
346. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the situation with respect to the promotion of alcohol at discos or in public houses; the restrictions placed on it; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39225/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The position is that section 20 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003 provides that a licence holder shall not supply alcohol on the premises at a reduced price during a limited period on any day. “Reduced price” means a price less than that regularly being charged for the alcohol concerned during an earlier period on the day concerned. A licence holder who contravenes this provision is guilty of an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €1,500 for a first offence or €2,000 for a second or subsequent offence.
In addition, section 16 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 provides for the making of regulations prohibiting or restricting a person from doing or permitting anything that is likely to encourage persons in that place to consume alcohol to an excessive extent. Any such regulations must be notified in draft form to the European Commission under the EU Standards Directive.
Irresponsible promotions of alcohol run counter to ongoing efforts by licensing trade bodies and the Department of Health and Children to promote the responsible sale and serving of alcohol. I would therefore encourage individual licensees not to engage in such promotions and to support activities promoting the responsible sale and serving of alcohol.
347. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the requirements necessary to register with the Private Security Authority; the cost of same; if it is obligatory; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39226/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Private Security Authority, established under the Private Security Services Act 2004, is the regulatory body with responsibility for regulating and licensing the private security industry. The Authority is an independent body under the aegis of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
[720]The issues referred to in the Deputy’s Question are matters for which the Authority has sole responsibility. I have forwarded the Deputy’s Question to the Authority and have requested that they reply to him directly.
348. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will report fully on recent reports that approximately 32,000 motorists who were initially charged with drink-driving over the past five years were subsequently not processed through the courts system; the reason the level of conviction is so low; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39230/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I expect to receive a full report which I have requested from the Garda authorities on the matter shortly, at which stage I will communicate further with the Deputy.
349. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of parking wardens employed by each local authority; the number of parking tickets issued in 2006 and 2007; the revenue generated from these activities in 2006 and 2007 in fines and so on; and the estimated pay roll cost and total cost of the parking warden services in these authorities in 2006 and 2007. [39248/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I have no responsibility in respect of the matters raised by the Deputy, which are matters for my colleague the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
350. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on whether the ongoing levels of murderous mayhem associated with illegal drugs is a threat to the State; the measures he is taking to end the levels of serious crime produced by drugs criminality and to protect neighbourhoods here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39251/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by An Garda Síochána that all available intelligence is fully analysed and used in the strategic deployment of both local and specialised operational Garda units to target particular gangs. Organised crime, including persons suspected of involvement in drug-trafficking, importation, sale and supply, is being targeted on a number of fronts, involving uniform and plain-clothes Gardaí overtly and covertly disrupting known criminals in the course of criminal activities. Members, their operating methods, criminal interests and financial assets are likewise proactively targeted.
An Garda Síochána, in co-operation with its multi-agency law enforcement partners, including the Revenue Commissioners, will ensure that all available resources will be deployed in targeting the major gangs involved in drug trafficking in accordance with the National Drugs Strategy.
Some of the steps taken by An Garda Síochána to date to address the sale, supply, importation and distribution of illegal drugs include the following:
[721]the allocation of additional resources at the Garda National Drugs Unit, as well at District and Divisional levels;
the establishment, on a permanent basis, of the Organised Crime Unit (OCU) with the specific objective of targeting those suspected of involvement in organised crime, including drug trafficking, importation, sale and supply. The OCU work in close association with other specialist units including the Criminal Assets Bureau, the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation, along with the Garda National Drugs Unit, which has the specific national remit, in targeting those persons at Divisional, District and national level, who are suspected of involvement in this type of criminality;
the establishment of dedicated Divisional and District Drug Units and the allocation of additional personnel to those already established;
internationally, An Garda Síochána works closely with relevant law enforcement agencies including all EU agencies, the Drugs Enforcement Agency (US), Interpol and Europol. An Garda Síochána also has Liaison Officers based in the Hague, London, Paris, Madrid, Europol and Interpol;
participation at the Maritime Analysis Operations Centre for Narcotics, which was recently established in Lisbon, Portugal. A Garda and a Customs Liaison Officer have been assigned to the Centre;
ongoing training programme for personnel as Divisional Asset Profilers, who have the specific remit of targeting assets of persons who are suspected of being involved in the importation, sale and supply of drugs at local, divisional / district level.
Measures have been put in place to deal with serious crime, including Operation Anvil, which commenced in May 2005 in the Dublin Metropolitan Region and was extended countrywide in 2006. The primary focus of Operation Anvil is the disruption of serious and organised criminal activity. In this regard Operation Anvil consists of intelligence-led targeted operations on the one hand and an increased overt visible Garda presence on the other. The Garda Commissioner has publicly re-affirmed his absolute commitment to the objectives of Operation Anvil, which is but one tool used by members of An Garda Síochána in endeavouring to combat crime.
An allocation of €20 million was ring-fenced from the Garda Budget 2008 to ensure ongoing operations under Anvil, which are augmented by other operations and initiatives, both locally and nationally, continue to be undertaken by all units and sections of An Garda Síochána. An increased allocation of €21 million has been made for 2009.
Multi-agency approaches have been and continue to be used where all of the Garda national units from National Support Services, i.e. the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, Criminal Assets Bureau, Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation (Money Laundering), Garda National Drugs Unit, and the Garda Technical Bureau, are used to combat serious crime. These units are also supported by the Security and Intelligence Section which assist with intelligence briefings and timely information.
An Garda Síochána is in ongoing liaison with international law enforcement agencies to counteract the activities of persons who attempt to continue their criminal endeavours from outside the jurisdiction.
Organised criminal gangs operating in this jurisdiction are being targeted on an ongoing basis and profiles regarding the personnel of such groups are continually updated. Their members, [722]operating methods, criminal interests, and financial assets are likewise proactively targeted and a Garda response embraces intelligence-led operations primarily undertaken by An Garda Síochána specialised units such as the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, the Garda National Drug Unit, the Organised Crime Unit, and the Criminal Assets Bureau.
A number of organised crime groups have been targeted in this manner recently with firearms recovered and drugs seized resulting in a number of people being prosecuted and convicted before the courts. Where there is justification and a legal basis, those suspected of involvement in criminal activity are arrested, detained and questioned in relation to specific crime.
The Criminal Assets Bureau is being actively utilised to identify and target funds accumulated by criminals, in order to seize such assets and to deprive them of the profits of their criminal activity. A dedicated unit within the Garda National Drugs Unit has been established to liaise with the Criminal Assets Bureau to particularly target those criminals and criminal groupings believed to be deriving profits and assets from drug-related criminal activity.
Senior Garda management is satisfied that, in addition to the considerable volumes of drugs seized, significant impact has been made by arresting and prosecuting a number of major players suspected of being involved in drug-trafficking through the importation, sale and distribution of drugs. A significant number of crime gangs involved in this type of criminal activity have been disrupted and dismantled.
The Garda National Drugs Unit is also conducting a number of ongoing operations in-cooperation with the Revenue Customs and other international law enforcement units. Garda Liaison Officers allocated to London, The Hague, Madrid, Europol and Interpol also assist with the international aspects of such operations targeting drug-traffickers.
International co-operation in intelligence-led policing is a major instrument employed in controlling the flow of drugs into Ireland. Ireland is also a full member of the MAOC(N) group based in Lisbon, which is an international intelligence led operation against trafficking at sea. The targeting of international traffickers is supplemented by a vigorous policy against persons in the Irish State who are supplying controlled drugs.
This integrated approach adopts best practice in implementing the co-ordinated use of Garda resources and using available criminal legislation to its fullest extent. Operations are reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure their effectiveness.
The arrest of three individuals and the seizure of a yacht believed to contain very large quantities of cocaine off the Irish coast in recent days is an example of the types of initiatives in which An Garda Síochána is involved at a multi-agency and international level and the success that this approach can deliver.
351. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, further to Parliamentary Questions No. 787 of 17 June 2008 and No. 300 of 7 October 2008, when the information sought will be forthcoming; the reasons for the delay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39257/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer further to your Parliamentary Questions No. 787 of Tuesday 17 June, 2008 and No. 300 of Tuesday 7 October, 2008 with regard to licensed firearms. The information sought was not readily available and took time to be compiled.
[723]The Garda Authorities now inform me that the figures, by type, for licensed firearms are as follows:
The firearms licensing year is from 1 August to 31 July of the following year. To additionally analyse the data by calibre would involve considerable Garda time and resources.
The Deputy will be aware that I have already indicated my concern at the increase in the number of handguns being licensed and, as I have informed the house previously, a review of firearms legislation is being finalised at present in my Department in consultation with An Garda Síochána. I intend that proposals emerging from it will be included in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill which is under preparation at present.
352. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if a visa will be granted to a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39298/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The visa application referred to by the Deputy was received in the Visa Office, Moscow, on 3 September 2008. It was refused by the Visa Officer on 25 September 2008 for the following reasons:
1. The need to undertake the course of study in this State was not demonstrated.
2. The obligations to return to the home country were not deemed sufficient.
The decision of the Visa Officer may be appealed within two months of the date of decision, in this case before 25 November 2008. Full details on how to lodge an appeal through the Visa Office in Moscow can be found at www.embassyofireland.ru.
353. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will ensure that the residency application of a person (details supplied) in County Donegal is dealt with quickly. [39300/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): As the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted.
[724]While it is not the practice to comment on such applications where a final decision has not been made, I can confirm that the person concerned has made an application for refugee status in the State. This application is the subject of Judicial Review Proceedings taken by the person concerned challenging a determination made in the context of his application for refugee status. Given that these Proceedings are ongoing, it would not be appropriate for me to make any further comment in the matter at this time.
As the Deputy will appreciate, the consideration of any residency application made by the person concerned must await the finalisation of his application for refugee status.
354. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will provide an estimate of the cost of legal services which his Department paid for in 2007 and to date in 2008; and if he is satisfied that effective measures are in place to minimise this cost. [39314/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I can inform the Deputy that, for the most part, the legal services sought by my Department and its associated bodies are co-ordinated and paid for by the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. These services are typically sought in the context of the preparation of legislation, legal advice in respect of policy issues and in the management of litigation including judicial reviews.
In a number of instances, my Department and its associated bodies, in accordance with normal procurement procedures, have sought and paid for legal advice and services additional to those provided for centrally by the Attorney General and the Chief State Solicitor. The estimated amounts for 2007 and to date in 2008 are listed below:
The Deputy should note that these costs relate only to the legal services commissioned by my Department and its agencies and do not include matters such as the running costs of Tribunals, the legal costs payable to third parties which are funded by my Department and payments to the State Claims Agency, in respect of which a breakdown of the expenditure involved is not available.
355. Deputy P. J. Sheehan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision on an application for naturalisation by person (details supplied) in Dublin 8 will be made; if this application will result in a decision to grant naturalisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39446/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): An application for a certificate of naturalisation from the person referred to in the Deputy’s Question was received in the Citizenship section of my Department in December 2007. Officials in that section are currently processing applications received in July 2006. Applications are dealt with in chronological order as this is deemed to be the fairest to all applicants.
356. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current and projected position in relation to funding from his Department for the community alert programme, specifically for the northern region — Counties Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal — to year end 2008 and for 2009; his intentions towards Strategy 2007 to 2011; if he will assure all concerned of his commitment to continue funding this Muintir na Tíre delivered programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39481/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): A national strategy for Community Alert for the period 2007-2011 was launched in Autumn 2007. The new strategy includes a number of significant improvements. Training has been provided to the Garda sergeants and inspectors most closely involved with the Programme. In addition, the holding of information seminars is continuing for all liaison Gardaí and scheme co-ordinators for Garda Districts and Divisions.
I regard the work of Community Alert as important. In recent years, my Department has provided funding to Muintir na Tíre for the Community Alert Programme of €150,000 in 2004, €120,000 in 2005, €175,000 in 2006 and €200,000 in 2007. The funding covered costs associated with running the Programme, including salaries, travel and subsistence, staff training and administration. Funding was also provided by the Health Service Executive.
In 2008, Community Alert has received from my Department funding of €100,000 to date and has requested further funding. Further information was sought and received by my Department in relation to this request.
My Department is currently considering what further assistance it might be in a position to make available for the Community Alert Programme in the context of the resources available.
357. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the increase in headline crime for the past five years to date for Garda divisions in Dublin North, Dublin North Central and Dublin West. [39493/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Garda Síochána Act 2005 makes provision for the compilation and publication of crime statistics by the Central Statistics Office, as the national statistical agency, and the CSO has established a dedicated unit for this purpose.
I have requested the CSO to provide the statistics sought by the Deputy directly to her.
358. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of capital projects which have gone over budget in each of the past five years; the original estimate for each of these projects; the final cost of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39528/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): No capital projects have gone over budget in the past five years in my Department.
359. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [726] the severance packages for each retiring staff member in his Department over the past three years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39543/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The only severance package available to staff in my Department who have retired in the last three years is that which is applicable under the Civil Service Superannuation Scheme.
Entitlements under this Scheme include payment of a lump sum gratuity and annual pension, both of which are based on pensionable remuneration and reckonable service at the date of retirement.
360. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if enquiries into the authentication of documentation in the matter of application for family reunification in the name of a person (details supplied) in County Cork have been completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39580/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my previous answer to his Parliamentary Question.
I am informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that the person referred to by the Deputy made an application for Family Reunification in September 2005. Following the receipt of the application, it had been necessary to carry out an investigation into the authenticity of the documentation submitted. That investigation has since been completed and a decision on the application will issue shortly.
361. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if a student visa will be extended in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 15; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39581/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I have been informed by the General Immigration Division of my Department that there is no record of an application for an extension of permission to remain on student conditions in the State from the person referred to by the Deputy. It is open to the person concerned to apply in writing to the General Immigration Division of my Department enclosing with his application the documents listed below. On receipt of same the application will be fully considered.
1. Evidence of registration on a full time course leading to a qualification recognised by the Department of Education and Science.
3. Evidence of finances to indicate that he is in a position to financially support himself while in the State without recourse to public funds.
4. Evidence of full private medical insurance.
5. Copy of his passport (including all endorsed pages).
362. Deputy Mary O’Rourke asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will review the case of a person (details supplied) in County Westmeath. [39596/08]
[727]Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I have been informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that they are currently reviewing the case of the person referred to by the Deputy and that they will be in contact with the person concerned shortly with a decision.
363. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the allegations made by a person (details supplied) that their correspondence went missing; and if he will investigate whether the letters in question were stopped or their content passed on to any other individual or agency and whether letters from their correspondents, their names and the names of visitors have been passed to the police. [39635/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Governor of Cloverhill Prison has advised that he has received no complaint in relation to this matter from the person referred to by the Deputy.
364. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to complaints from a person (details supplied) that they have been suffering acute pain and other symptoms for months but that the prison doctor has refused to treat them; and if he will take action regarding the matter. [39636/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Since his committal to Cloverhill Prison, the person concerned has been in receipt of constant and on-going medical attention. He has been triaged by prison nurses, consulted prison doctors more than 40 times in 2008 and has had 6 doctor and 5 nurse consultations in recent months.
He has been prescribed medication appropriate to his medical condition and has not been denied any medication.
I understand that the person concerned had been refusing medical treatment for a medical condition until very recently. I am aware that the Nurse Manager at Cloverhill Prison met with him early last month and provided reassurance with regard to a forthcoming appointment and also provided clarification in relation to his dental care requirements.
I wish to assure the Deputy that the prison healthcare staff will continue to offer every assistance to him for the duration of his imprisonment.
365. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to an allegation made by a person (details supplied) that one of their visitors was subsequently visited at home by a detective from special branch who questioned them on the reason they visited the person; if reports of such harassment concern him; and if he will take action. [39637/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am advised by the Garda authorities that, as part of its investigation into an Offence under the Post Office Amendment Act 1951, as amended by the Postal and Telecommunications Act 1983, the pur[728]pose of the visit by the gardaí was to serve a Witness Order for the prosecution relevant to the above case.
366. Deputy Ciarán Cuffe asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the details of the development works undertaken by his Department under Section 181(2)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39651/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Deputy will be aware that the Office of Public Works has responsibility for the provision, refurbishment and maintenance of State buildings. I am informed that the Office of Public Works has no record of any development works undertaken by my Department under Section 181 (2) (a) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, since the Act was enacted.
