Seanad Eireann

Níl
Boyle, Dan.	Bradford, Paul.
Brady, Martin.	Burke, Paddy.
Butler, Larry.	Buttimer, Jerry.
Callanan, Peter.	Carty, John.
Cassidy, Donie.	Coffey, Paudie.
Coghlan, Paul.	Corrigan, Maria.
Cummins, Maurice.	Daly, Mark.
Donohoe, Paschal.	Ellis, John.
Feeney, Geraldine.	Glynn, Camillus.
Hanafin, John.	Healy Eames, Fidelma.
Keaveney, Cecilia.	Leyden, Terry.
MacSharry, Marc.	McDonald, Lisa.
Ó Domhnaill, Brian.	Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
O’Malley, Fiona.	O’Reilly, Joe.
O’Sullivan, Ned.	Ormonde, Ann.
Phelan, John Paul.	Phelan, Kieran.
Quinn, Feargal.	Walsh, Jim.
White, Mary M.	Wilson, Diarmuid.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Dominic Hannigan and Michael McCarthy; Níl, Senators Fiona O’Malley and Diarmuid Wilson.

Amendment declared lost.

Section 9 agreed to.

SECTION 10.

Question proposed: “That section 10 stand part of the Bill.”

Senator John Ellis: I would have preferred to raise this under section 7 but it had passed. It is very unfair that the Clerks of the two Houses of the Oireachtas and the Ombudsman are on [1070]the commission. It should be composed entirely of members of the Judiciary, with somebody who would do the statistics for them. The Judiciary should decide this because there are vested interests. I do not refer to anybody in particular, but it is open to vested interests to become involved. I say that because whatever documentation is produced is gone once the commission finishes, whereas if the Judiciary made the final decision it would be in a position to deal with the matter fairly with a non-vested interest. There could be vested interests and we would not know it, whereas the Judiciary has always been accepted as being above reproach and it should do this. It is very unfair.

Earlier I pointed out that the Ombudsman had to give a decision on my freedom of information application for documents. This meant the person who sat on the commission decided whether I should get documentation under the Freedom of Information Act. That is wrong. Those people are put in an invidious position by being on the commission. The Supreme Court is made up of a number of judges from the various courts. In this case one could take one judge from each of the Supreme Court, the High Court , the Circuit Court and the District Court. If one wanted an odd number one could add a fifth member. It is wrong that civil servants make the decision rather than somebody who is separate from it.

Senator Paudie Coffey: I add to what Senator Ellis said and speak to the Bill in general. I do not doubt the independence of the commission as it is recommended in the Bill. My party takes the view that each individual on the commission is totally independent and is entitled to be on the commission. A section of the Bill refers to the Central Statistics Office, CSO, and the staff who will assist the commission in its work. It is very important that this facility is available to the commission. The director general of the CSO and the chief executive officer of Ordnance Survey Ireland, OSI, will assist the commission in reaching its recommendations on Dáil and European Parliament constituencies. I wonder what level of engagement might have happened heretofore with those two agencies, the CSO and the OSI, and whether there was real engagement with them in the commission arriving at its recommendations. I hope there was.

This Bill refers to the fundamentals of our democracy. It deals specifically with constituencies, whether Dáil or European Parliament, and the numbers and demographics in those constituencies. It is important that the information the commission uses is fully up to date and endorsed by the agencies responsible for those statistics. I have not read the report but I wonder if it makes specific mention of engagement with those agencies, the CSO and OSI. If so, will the Minister comment on the extent of that engagement and the advice the agencies might have given to the commission? That is an important point regarding having accurate information for any recommendations or reports by the commission. The information and levels of engagement by those agencies should be clear and transparent.

Deputy Michael P. Kitt: We are discussing the nomination of candidates for the European Parliament elections. The Electoral Act 1997 sets out membership of a constituency commission, as follows:

(a) (i) a judge of the Supreme Court, or

(ii) following consultation with the President of the High Court, a judge of the High Court, nominated by the Chief Justice, who shall be the chairperson of the Commission,

(b) the Ombudsman,

[1071]

(d) the Clerk of the Dáil, and

(e) the Clerk of the Seanad.

While we might not agree with the commission, we value its independence — I have been saying that all afternoon. I put the case that we accept in its entirety the work and results of the commission.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 11 to 14, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 15.

Question proposed: “That section 15 stand part of the Bill.”

Senator Paudie Coffey: Section 15 is very topical with the local elections coming up in June. There are regulations set down here which we will not oppose. They are recommended and Fine Gael will support them. If an individual wants to offer his or her candidature for local elections, it should be encouraged by all political parties. The elected representative reflects society and the public which he or she represents. In these difficult and trying times it is most important that all institutions of the State, including the Upper and Lower Houses of the Oireachtas, have proper regulations in place regarding candidacy in elections. It should be seen by the public that there are no unnecessary barriers to a person’s candidacy for election to represent his or her local area. For that reason, I welcome these regulations.

Line 10 in the section refers to: “The requirement on candidates referred to in article 14(7) to secure 15 assents or make a deposit in accordance with article 15”. Heretofore, the number required was much higher. That is welcome for independent candidates who wish to offer themselves for election and do not have a party structure to support them. As a democrat, I welcome this. They will not have to bus in 30 or 40 people — I believe 50 were required at one stage — to support their candidacy. It can be an unnecessary burden for somebody who wishes to participate in elections. I would offer encouragement to any person, from whatever party or none, who would put their head above the parapet by putting their name on the ballot paper to go before the electorate. Anybody who enters the political process, be it at town council or county level, is to be admired. All parties and Independent Members in this House would encourage people who offer themselves as candidates in the forthcoming local elections.

The Bill is quite detailed with regard to the regulations. I have read them and they appear to be in order. Fine Gael welcomes them. In these trying times, we are seeking leadership. We are also looking for people who might have aspirations in the political sphere to step up to the mark, put themselves before the public and let the public scrutinise what they stand for in the local elections. I am sure the public will elect people who will show leadership in town, city and county councils throughout the country. I wish the candidates who go forward, and many of them are out canvassing already, well in the forthcoming elections.

Senator Paddy Burke: The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government recently announced spending limits for the local elections. He said he would underpin the announcement with legislation that could not be included in this Bill. What is the position with the promised legislation mentioned by the Minister? There are 14 weeks to the local elections and it is only two or three weeks to St. Patrick’s Day. The Houses take that week off. The legislation must be introduced but it has not yet been published. It is of the utmost importance that the promised legislation either be included in this Bill or be published and put before the House as soon as possible. We are nearly at the run-in period to the local elections.

[1072]Senator Dominic Hannigan: Some points were raised regarding the assentors for non-party candidates. I understand that currently, the number of assentors required for a county council election is 15 but that it is higher, possibly 40 or 50, for a Dáil election. That is when one sees busloads of people being brought through the county to county hall. I have a question about the assentors. My understanding from the last occasion, in 2004, is that the assentors had to turn up in person. Is that a misunderstanding? Will the Minister clarify if that will still be the case?

It is difficult for a non-party candidate to get 15 people, especially if they have young families, to take time off and turn up at a place that is, perhaps, 30 miles away. During the last local elections I spoke to a non-party candidate in the Meath electoral area. She had driven almost 30 miles to register at the place of registration. Bringing 15 people makes it more complex and difficult for non-party candidates to put their name on the ballot paper. While I would encourage people to join my party, I respect the fact that non-party candidates can add to the overall electoral process.

It is not clear from the Bill whether the Minister intends to issue guidance on this matter. Section 15(c) refers to “the time and place at which nomination papers may be obtained”. Presumably, in this day and age these could be downloaded from computers. It would save people the trouble of having to get in the car and travel to county hall or wherever to get copies of the nomination papers. Surely they could be downloaded from a pdf file from the Internet. Perhaps the Minister would give advice in this regard for local returning officers. We should seek to minimise the distances travelled by candidates and assentors in the local election process and make it as easy as possible so as to encourage more people into the electoral process.

Senator Coffey mentioned people who raise their heads above the parapet. It is a scary place, and once one decides to run there is no going back. We should encourage people to get involved. It is good for democracy. We can do that by making the process simple. I accept that everybody cannot run; one cannot have 4 million people running in the local elections. However, if there are serious potential candidates, we must do what we can to make their path as simple and stress free as possible. We must encourage more people into the system. I hope that after the passage of this legislation the Minister will issue guidance to make matters easier for prospective candidates.

Deputy Michael P. Kitt: Section 15 amends the local elections regulations of 1995 by inserting articles 11 to 20 in substitution for the existing ones. These articles cover the nomination of non-party candidates at local elections, bringing the procedures into line with those enacted for Dáil elections in the Electoral (Amendment) Act 2007 and proposed in this Bill for European Parliament elections.

The new articles provide for two alternative mechanisms to regulate the nomination of candidates at local elections who are not in possession of a certificate of political affiliation confirming that he or she is a candidate of a political party registered on the register of political parties. The first mechanism is by way of assents, requiring the completion of a statutory declaration by 15 assentors, registered as electors in the relevant local electoral area, which may be witnessed by one of five categories — a commissioner for oaths, peace commissioner, notary public, a garda or a local authority official. The alternative is by way of the candidate or somebody on his or her behalf lodging a deposit of €100 in the case of the election of members of county or city councils and €50 in the case of any other election. A total of 30 assentors are required for a Dáil election and 60 for elections to the European Parliament.

With regard to the assent procedure, the proposal to use statutory declarations provides for a more flexible system. Previously, every assentor had to travel to the local authority office to [1073]sign the candidate’s nomination paper. Assentor signatures will now be on documents attached to the nomination paper, not on the actual paper. The process will not involve the busloads of people mentioned by the Senators.

In reply to Senator Burke’s question about spending limits in local elections, the Minister has stated he will shortly publish a Bill to introduce the spending limits that will be in force for the local elections scheduled to take place on 5 June 2009. There is a sliding scale for the 34 county and city councils, with four separate spending limits based on the population within each electoral area. An upper limit of €15,000 will apply in the most populated electoral areas with a population of 32,501 persons or over, a limit of €13,000 will apply in the county and city electoral areas where the population is between 22,501 and 32,500 persons, and a limit of €11,500 will apply to county and city council electoral areas with a population of between 12,001 and 22,500 persons. The lowest limit of €9,750 will apply to county and city council electoral areas with a population of 12,000 persons or less. A standard spending limit will apply to all 80 of the borough and town councils. Candidates standing for these elections to local authorities will be subject to a spending limit of €7,500. That is the position on the spending limits and the legislation will be published shortly.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 16.

Question proposed: “That section 16 stand part of the Bill.”

Senator Dominic Hannigan: I want to be clear that I understand this. It is important how we distribute the surpluses when it comes to the election. Section 16 states:

The Local Elections Regulations are amended by substituting the following sub-article for sub-article (8) of article 83:

“(8) The returning officer shall not transfer the surplus of a candidate deemed to be elected whenever that surplus, together with any other surplus not transferred, is less than both the difference between the quota and the number of votes credited to the highest continuing candidate and the difference between the numbers of the votes credited to the two lowest continuing candidates and, in cases where the lowest candidate, or someone on his or her behalf, made a deposit in accordance with article 15 at the election concerned, either—

(a) the number of votes credited to the lowest candidate is greater than one quarter of the quota, or

(b) the sum of the number of votes credited to the lowest candidate together with that surplus and any other surplus not transferred is not greater than one quarter of the quota.”.

I would be concerned that such guidance will be difficult to implement or explain in the heat of an election count, especially, for instance, on the eighth or ninth count. In some cases it might be very late into the night or well into the morning when two or three votes here or there could be the difference between being elected or eliminated or not being elected. I would be concerned about how understandable such clauses are. This can make or break an election. It can swing on the presence or absence of a comma, and in that sentence of 100 or 110 words there is one comma. I would ask the Minister of State for an explanation of what that means [1074]merely so that we can be crystal clear on the record about what this will mean when it comes to transfers of surpluses.

As he will be well aware, one of the reasons we withdrew the electronic voting machines was because questions were raised about how they distributed surpluses. I could be wrong here and if so, I stand corrected. I am getting a nod from Senator Ellis. I remember at the time going through the technical issues and it is quite a tedious process to work out exactly how these things are done. We paid experts in mathematics, statistics and computer programming to design these systems, processes and codes in the first instances, and they got it wrong. In the heat of the day when people’s blood is up and they are concerned that they are about to win or lose a seat, we expect the poor returning officer to go to his briefcase, pull out this legislation and read this out.

I am sure the Minister of State has a great deal more experience than I have of elections. Having looked at his electoral history, I would say at this stage he has contested in the order of ten general elections.

Deputy Michael P. Kitt: Yes.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: I am sure he knows exactly to what I am refer. I would be concerned that this is not clear. We have some very bright returning officers and no doubt they will make it their job to understand this, but I am concerned more about how the councillor who feels very much under pressure at the eighth or ninth count of the day or the candidate who thinks he or she is about to get elected will react to this and how we will explain this to them. I would like the Minister of State to talk me through it.

4 o’clock

Senator John Ellis: Senator Hannigan has a point. Where surpluses are used as part of the vote transfer in a general election, it is up to the returning officer who can select from any bundle and it is not pure proportional representation. I experienced this many moons ago when the bundles from the surplus selected to be gone through were not balanced across the constituency. It is a matter that should be looked at in the context of further electoral reform that the transfer of surpluses is dealt with in a proper manner, as is done in the case of Seanad elections where they are proportioned out fully. In the case of general elections the bundles chosen by the returning officer are those used for the transfer of surpluses and it does not always give a equal balance on how the electorate was thinking.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I am disappointed the commission did not get the job of overseeing elections. That matter should be transferred out of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government into a specific election department. I do not say that against any official. It is time that we had an independent electoral commission dealing exclusively and solely with elections.

I agree with Senators Hannigan and Ellis on the issue of the transfer of surpluses. It is imperative. If the Minister of State does nothing else today, we need to educate people about the proportional representation single transferable vote system. We have not done that despite the most elaborate concoctions ever in the Department.

We need to go back and review from where the ballots come to be distributed. The Seanad system is probably a fairer one——

Senator John Ellis: The fairest.

[1075]Senator Jerry Buttimer: ——where there is an equitable distribution of votes across the board. That might lead to all sorts of mathematical permutations and it might mean the Clerk of the Seanad would go on tour throughout the country to educate all the returning officers. There are anomalies in the system. We have seen them and they are undemocratic.

The other matter with which I am disappointed is one which the Acting Chairman will roar at me for raising.

Acting Chairman (Senator Geraldine Feeney): I never roar.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: The commission should have been given the power to tell the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government get rid of the electronic voting machines and consign them to history. I do not say that as a political point.

I love the cut and thrust of the count. I have been beaten and I have been director of elections on count day. I remember ringing a great friend of mine, former Senator Cregan, at 2 o’clock in the afternoon to say he was finished and at 2 o’clock in the morning he won by six votes. The ballot box, as my mother used to say, is a great leveller. One knows who one’s friends are.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: One does not.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: One does.

Senator Paudie Coffey: One knows how many one has.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: Exactly. The electronic voting machine is like Murphy’s law. It is like going in to Dunnes Stores and getting a receipt. It is cold, uninviting, non-participatory and, dare I say it, takes away from the cut and thrust of the old blood battle. I say that unashamedly. One cannot beat being in Neptune Stadium or City Hall on the day of a count and we are all there in all our emotions, in good and bad, winning and losing. That is part of politics, especially local politics because that is about community.

I would be a little concerned regarding the issue of nomination for elections. I do not want to make it exclusive. I spoke earlier about the issue of expenses. I have a genuine concern that we will make politics the preserve of the rich and of a few when democracy is not about that. Democracy should be about all of us participating, be it running for office or being involved in or organising campaigns.

Acting Chairman: As it is now 4 p.m., I am required to put the following question in accordance with an order voted on by the Seanad of this day.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I want to raise a point of order.

Acting Chairman: I am sorry.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: This is an important debate and I have not finished what I wanted to say.

Acting Chairman: I am putting the question. I am sorry.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: On a point of order, what is the rush?

Acting Chairman: I cannot let the Senator make a point of order,

Senator Jerry Buttimer: What is the rush? On a point of information——

[1076]Acting Chairman: I must ask the Senator to resume his seat. I cannot allow him a point of order. I must put the question. I ask Senators to resume their seats. The Chair is not allowing a point of order. I am putting the question.

Senator Maurice Cummins: So much for democracy.

Acting Chairman: The question is: “That in respect of each of the sections undisposed of, the section is hereby agreed to in Committee, the Schedule and Title are hereby agreed to——

(Interruptions).

Acting Chairman: ——the Bill is, accordingly, reported to the House without amendment, the Fourth Stage is hereby completed, the Bill is hereby received for final consideration, and the Bill is hereby passed.”

Question put.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 27; Níl, 17.

Tá
Boyle, Dan.	Brady, Martin.
Butler, Larry.	Callanan, Peter.
Carty, John.	Cassidy, Donie.
Corrigan, Maria.	Daly, Mark.
Ellis, John.	Feeney, Geraldine.
Glynn, Camillus.	Hanafin, John.
Keaveney, Cecilia.	Leyden, Terry.
MacSharry, Marc.	McDonald, Lisa.
Ó Domhnaill, Brian.	Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
O’Brien, Francis.	O’Malley, Fiona.
O’Sullivan, Ned.	Ormonde, Ann.
Phelan, Kieran.	Ross, Shane.
Walsh, Jim.	White, Mary M.
Wilson, Diarmuid.

Níl
Bradford, Paul.	Burke, Paddy.
Buttimer, Jerry.	Coffey, Paudie.
Coghlan, Paul.	Cummins, Maurice.
Doherty, Pearse.	Donohoe, Paschal.
Fitzgerald, Frances.	Hannigan, Dominic.
McCarthy, Michael.	McFadden, Nicky.
Norris, David.	O’Reilly, Joe.
Phelan, John Paul.	Quinn, Feargal.
Ryan, Brendan.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Camillus Glynn and Diarmuid Wilson; Níl, Senators Paudie Coffey and Maurice Cummins.

Question declared carried.

An Cathaoirleach: For the information of the House, when the Chair has started putting a question no point of order or point of information can be raised.

Senator Paudie Coffey: On a point of order, we held a useful debate on this Bill, but the way in which it was guillotined through the House is an affront to democracy. This is a parliamentary democracy and Senators were on their feet when this Bill was guillotined from Committee Stage to its finish. It is a shame that the Government is practising democracy in [1077]this way. This is about the fundamentals of democracy and shame on the Government for guillotining this Bill.

Senators: Hear, hear.

An Cathaoirleach: The time for debate was agreed on the Order of Business this morning and I, or whoever else is in the Chair, must abide by that.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: It is a disgrace.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: We did not have an opportunity to debate certain sections of the Bill. We should have returned to it.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: Wait until Fianna Fáil councillors hear about this.

Senator Paul Coghlan: Some of them have already become Independents.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Dick Roche): I thank Seanad Members for tabling this matter for discussion. Considerable interest, concern and outrage have been expressed in the Seanad at the tragic events that have taken place in the Middle East and, in particular, recent developments in Gaza. There can be no doubt that what has happened in Gaza was a tragedy that should not be repeated. Today’s debate is opportune because the dreadful events that have taken place since Christmas have reminded us of the very high stakes involved and the continuing potential for shocking violence. The region is a tinderbox and is ready to explode at any moment, and the real victims are innocent people who merely want to get on with their lives.

The events also demonstrate the very high price of failure if this seemingly intractable conflict is not resolved. This may be a critical year in terms of determining whether we can build momentum towards peace and find a new way through the many interlocking problems which have frustrated all efforts thus far.

Senator David Norris: I do not wish rudely to interrupt the Minister of State but I wonder whether a script is available.

Deputy Dick Roche: I ask the Senator to excuse me for the bad habit of a lifetime. I was writing my speech until five minutes before I entered the House.

Senator David Norris: That gives it greater relevancy.

Deputy Dick Roche: A copy may be available of an earlier draft but I will be departing significantly from it. Senator Norris will be aware that when I sat in this House as a Senator I held strong views about Ministers reading scripts prepared by civil servants.

Senator David Norris: The Minister of State never had a difficulty with free-ranging contributions.

Deputy Dick Roche: The agenda for 2008 set at the Annapolis conference in December 2007 committed Israel and the Palestinian Authority to work together to reach an overall agreement within the year. Few were surprised this ambitious target was not achieved but if we are not ambitious we will never make progress. The Israeli Government and the President of the Palestinian Authority pursued direct negotiations throughout the year on the final settlement issues. Particular credit is due to the latter, given the grave difficulties he faced internally. [1078] While there was undoubted frustration, particularly on the Palestinian side, that the talks did not proceed more quickly, it was generally acknowledged that some headway was being made. Perhaps the most heartening sign was that so little detail emerged. For once the parties seemed to be focused on making progress rather than preparing for the blame game.

Another very positive sign was the recommencement under the aegis of the Turkish Government of proximity talks between Israel and Syria. Incidentally, the Turkish Government is entitled to considerable credit in particular in terms of its attempts to bring Syria and Israel together. It has revived a track that has lain dormant since 2000. Clearly, Syria must be part of a long-term solution given its interest in securing the return of the Golan Heights and its relationship with more rejectionist Palestinian elements. There remains serious clouds on the horizon, notably, the continued isolation of Gaza, which is unacceptable and causes concern to every civilised Government. A second issue that arises is the rift on the Palestinian side between Fatah and Hamas and the continuation of Israeli settlement building on the West Bank and in east Jerusalem.

There are some grounds for believing that events might be moving in the right direction although these have received a setback in the violent conflict of Gaza. Three weeks of violent military action left more than 1,300 people, caused massive destruction and left an estimated 40,000 people homeless. Both sets of negotiations have been suspended; any emerging trust between the parties has been seriously damaged and our attention is now focused primarily on the humanitarian needs of the people of Gaza. I do not seek today to replay the causes or course of the Gaza operations as the matter has been already discussed by both Houses and in particular in this House. Government Ministers and Oireachtas Members from all sides have received many representations from the public which, incidentally, is a testament to the strong views of the Irish people on this matter.

Israel and its representatives have strongly defended their action as the only course left open by the repeated attacks on their cities by missiles fired from Gaza and by Hamas and other militant groups. Ireland, in its response to the unfolding events, made clear that the firing of missiles at Israeli civilian targets was completely unacceptable. The ferocity, scale and extent of the Israeli military response was, in our view, entirely indefensible and completely disproportionate.

Senator David Norris: Hear, hear.

Deputy Dick Roche: The Government’s views on this have been made clear. The use of such a degree of force and, in particular, the use of heavy weapons such as phosphorous in built up areas is completely unacceptable. Regardless of what efforts were made to minimise civilian casualties, in these circumstances, large-scale damage and civilian deaths were simply unavoidable and inevitable.

We have also drawn attention to specific aspects of the operation, including the use of incendiary munitions and the attacks on UN facilities. I pay tribute again to the director of UNRWA operations in Gaza, Mr. John Ging, and, through him, to all his staff who worked so hard during the crisis and who were exemplar in terms of the humanitarian effort. The Government, through the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, has raised questions about the legality under international law of some of these actions. It needs to be said that the firing of missiles on Israeli towns is, beyond doubt, a breach of international law. The breach of law by a terrorist group or a group that has been or is in the process of moving away from terrorism cannot be an excuse for a Government to also breach international law.

[1079]Large-scale fighting in Gaza came to an end with unilaterally declared ceasefires on 18 January, which we all greeted with relief. However, the truce is fragile, which should give us cause for concern. The fragile truce is continually endangered by low level breaches. As this is a tinderbox region, even a small incident can escalate quickly into major violence. We are concerned that a simple de facto truce could not last long. Talks brokered by the Government of Egypt, which has played a very significant role in all these events, have sought to bring about a more lasting agreed ceasefire and to put in place the necessary elements identified in UN Security Council Resolution 1860 of 8 January, including full and sustained opening of border crossings and an end to all rocket attacks on southern Israel.

There are hopeful, though weak, signs that an agreement on these terms may now be close. This would be a very important advance for securing the future of the people of Gaza, and of Israel, and to start laying the conditions for a longer-term understanding so that disaster does not recur every year or two, as has been the case in this region. I appeal today to the leaders on both sides to put their people first and to give peace a chance to blossom in an arid region. Everything is worth doing if it leads to agreement. There is no doubt that in the long term the solution will not be found at the end of bullets or guns but through talks. People who wish to live in close proximity must talk to each other. It would be tragic if this ceasefire, like that of June 2008 which lasted for six months, were seen by some leaders principally as an opportunity to reload and prepare for a future conflict. That would be condemnatory of the motives of both sides.

There are continuing serious concerns in relation to Gaza. First and foremost, the humanitarian situation continues to be fragile, with insufficient access by the Israeli authorities for humanitarian agencies and supplies. The Government again strongly urges the Israeli Government to remove the unjustified restrictions on humanitarian and commercial traffic into Gaza. These conditions create the conditions in which terrorism will grow. This comes as no surprise to us. We know what happens when people are forced to live in ghettos — it becomes a powder cake and the recruitment ground for terrorism. The lifting of the restriction should include in particular the necessary materials to allow for reconstruction of Gaza, including homes, economic infrastructure and utilities. One cannot keep a population of that size imprisoned in an area which has none of the things we take for granted in terms of civilised living.

There remains longer-term legal and political issues about the conduct of the war which cannot be simply forgotten. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has added Ireland’s voice to those calling for independent investigation of some of the incidents during the war and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has taken the lead in establishing a panel to investigate incidents affecting UN facilities. It is clear and obvious that international law was breached in those cases.

Ireland believes that events have shown that we were right last year to argue for a linkage between an upgrade in EU-Israel relations, which we support in principle, as we do in respect of all our Mediterranean neighbours, and progress on key political issues of mutual concern. It will be recalled that the Government was criticised, not in the House, but in some quarters for suggesting there must be a linkage. I reiterate that there must be a linkage if we are to improve and upgrade relations between the European Union and Israel, which I support. However, there must be reciprocal recognition of the sensitivities of the European Union in these matters.

Ireland has consistently sought to keep the international political focus on the hard work of pursuing the path to peace rather than allowing itself to be always dominated by the latest crisis, which the Middle East never fails to supply. Indeed, we need to be aware that many ill-intentioned people actively seek to distract us. However ghastly Gaza has been and however much we need to give attention to its continuing aftermath, no-one can doubt that in the long run the only way to avert a repeat of these dreadful scenes is to work actively to assist the [1080]reaching comprehensive peace between Israel and its neighbours that will serve the people of Israel, Gaza, Syria and the whole region. War serves no cause. The vision of two states living side by side in peace, which we need to keep before us at all times, is the only viable way forward.

There are many factors in flux now that will alter the dynamic of that process, for good or ill, in 2009. We await the formation of a new Israeli Government following the elections on 10 February, which could be a lengthy process and may cause further problems. It must be said that the continuing fragmentation of Israeli politics is a concern at this crucial time. While that is an internal matter, it is a reality. The key point is that the new Israeli Government, whatever its political make-up, should be encouraged to adhere to the commitments made in the past by Israel on behalf of its people, in particular the commitments made at Annapolis, and to continue to work genuinely for a settlement which is now achievable.

Perhaps just as important but even more difficult is the process on the Palestinian side. Open hostility between the Fatah and Hamas movements has played into the hands of those who do not wish to see the well-being of the Palestinian side progressed. Egypt is working from its unique position in the region to try to bring together the two sides to devise a way forward. I have seen at first hand some of the diplomatic efforts made by the Egyptians and they have not received anything like due recognition internationally or——

Senator David Norris: Or blame for their disgusting behaviour.

Deputy Dick Roche: On this issue, I make the point they are on the right side.

We must nurture and be suitably supportive of all efforts underway at achieving intra-Palestinian reconciliation, since early progress in reviving overall peace efforts is best achieved. At a meeting between the different sides, I said one of the reasons there was such a disproportionate response was the reality that the brothers were divided, and the fact there were two sides on the Palestinian side gave encouragement for the disproportionate activity we saw in Gaza. This is the point I see as praiseworthy in the efforts of Egypt. The important criterion to apply to such a development will be to judge any Palestinian Government by its programme and its actions, rather than solely on its composition or the rhetoric of the different elements.

The third key factor, which we cannot yet judge, is the influence and engagement of President Obama and his team. It is very positive he has made it clear the US wants to have a different arrangement with the Middle East. There can be no doubt that many in the Middle East are hopeful he will bring new thinking and new commitment to the US Government’s role in supporting the peace effort. It is good he has made clear his intention to pursue peace actively and aggressively. Of course, we need to recall that the new President has many other priorities, even in the region, and to remember that at the end of the day it is the two parties who must make peace on the ground. However, the EU is strongly emphasising to the new US Administration the opportunity for peace that now exists, and that US support will be vital in achieving this.

We in Ireland, and many others, have been greatly heartened by the inspired appointment of Senator George Mitchell as the President’s Middle East envoy. We know the value of Senator Mitchell’s work and we know the extraordinary skill, patience, ingenuity and integrity he brings to the task.

It is also vital, as the Government has consistently argued, that the EU remains fully and actively engaged in supporting the peace process, both directly and through our membership of the quartet. This can take many forms — humanitarian and economic support to the Palestinian people, to help combat the appeal of those who argue that the political process [1081]offers them nothing; capacity building in the Palestinian Administration, so that it becomes able to assume the burdens of a state; political support and encouragement to both sides; and direct assistance and engagement, such as assistance in the re-opening of the border crossings in Gaza, which is vital. This is where Europe can play a real role.

The Government is also engaged and active on Ireland’s behalf. Senators will be aware that the Minister for Foreign Affairs visited the Middle East from 1 to 5 February, travelling to Syria, Lebanon and the United Arab Emirates. The Minister, Deputy Martin’s, talks in Damascus and Beirut were in many ways a continuation of his visit to Egypt, Israel and the Occupied Territories in July 2008. In discussions with President Assad, Prime Minister Siniora and others, he heard their assessments of the prospects and obstacles to peace. The Minister will report on his visit to his EU colleagues at next week’s General Affairs and External Relations Council.

Finally, to return to my starting point, the Minister will also attend on behalf of the Government the forthcoming reconstruction conference on Gaza which the Egyptian Government will host on 2 March. The conference is intended to provide clear political support to the Palestinian people in the aftermath of this war as well as addressing the daunting reconstruction needs in Gaza. Ireland provided €500,000 in humanitarian assistance to help the people of Gaza last month and a further contribution of humanitarian assistance is planned. The conference is also likely to be of value in identifying specific reconstruction needs and Ireland may be able to assist with this in the coming months.

Many foreign ministers, including most EU partners, are due to attend the conference, along with the UN Secretary General. This will also, therefore, provide an opportunity for discussion of the wider issues in the peace process and the region.

The problems involved in the Middle East peace process are complex and interlocking, as we all understand. There are many issues, some difficult, some intractable. The reality is we must continue to press ahead because the alternative to talk is war, and war is the least acceptable of all of the alternatives. I thank the House for its attention.

Senator Maurice Cummins: I welcome the Minister of State. As he stated, the Middle East has long been one of the world’s most unstable regions. As with Ireland, the communities in the Middle East have long memories and wage war and challenge each other based on previous conflicts. What saddens me most, however, is how often yesterday’s victims become today’s oppressors, making so many of the mistakes that they in the past were victims of. So we come to the situation in Gaza, where old mistakes were reheated and played out as they have been for decades.

My party has been highly critical of the events in the recent Gaza war. We have called for the independent verification of all allegations of war crimes and illegal behaviour, and those who committed war crimes, whoever they are and from whichever community, should face the full rigours of international law.

I do not believe in the zero-sum game where one side can justify its actions based on the wrongs done to it. It was wrong for Israeli citizens to face constant rocket attacks. Attacks on civilians are wrong and always wrong. However, what Israel experienced does not justify and can never justify the apparent use of white phosphorus in Gaza. I say apparent not because I have any doubts as to whether it was used — the evidence is overwhelming — but the implications of its use are so serious we need cast-iron evidence. I feel this evidence is available and verified.

In that regard, I applaud the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs on its resolution passed in recent weeks. It is important that this resolution is read into the record of the House. It states:

[1082]

That the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs urges the Irish Government to continue its support for moves to establish an independent international investigation into alleged violations of international humanitarian law during Israel’s military action in Gaza. These include: the use of white phosphorus in densely inhabited civilian areas; the use of dime munitions; the shelling of the UN facilities, including schools which were being used as places of sanctuary by Palestinian civilians; and the question of collective punishment. The motion also urges that discussions with the representatives of countries such as Belgium, Cyprus, Sweden and Portugal who have also supported this move be maintained. That the independent international investigation also investigates: the indiscriminate rocket attacks on civilians perpetrated by Hamas and others; the alleged storage of munitions in civilian locations; the allegations of the shooting of innocent Palestinians by Hamas; the alleged use of civilians as human shields by any actor; the alleged firing of rockets from positions adjacent to UN facilities, to schools and hospitals. Furthermore, that the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with the objective of the State of Israel and an independent Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security and urges the Government to continue to fully support such resolution of the conflict and to take all appropriate steps in the UN, at EU level and in its bilateral international relations to promote and achieve such resolution. It also supports the International Quartet (EU, USA, Russia and the UN) in its work, and other initiatives to resolve the conflict; welcomes the appointment by President Obama of George Mitchell as his Middle East peace envoy; calls on Iran to end its opposition to a two-state solution; and commends the initiative taken by Egypt to mediate a durable ceasefire.

It is a comprehensive motion which was agreed by all sides and it should be acted upon.

We should not mince our words in our criticism of all wrongs. This means criticising the conduct of Israel in Gaza and also criticising Hamas for its attacks on Israel. The tragedy in the Middle East is that there is not one conflict but many. The risks of a conflict between Lebanon and Israel are real.

Another problem is the attempt by Iran to develop nuclear technology and the insistence of Israel that it will do all it can to stop that from occurring, which adds another complication. We must also consider the situation in Iraq and the growing Islamic fundamentalism in other states. As with other countries in the West, we face difficult dilemmas in dealing with these cases.

The Middle East has been an unstable region for centuries. Much of the instability was caused by outside interference from the great empires of the day. These interventions and regional rivalries have left a legacy of bitterness and distrust that haunt the region to this day. I hope that the peoples of the Middle East and those tempted to intervene from outside learn the lessons of history, rather than repeat the mistakes.

Like the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, I praise Mr. John Ging for his efforts. He has carried out trojan work in the region. There will be a new Government soon following the elections in Israel. I hope that the disastrous foreign policy of President Bush will be replaced by that of President Obama and the new Secretary of State, Senator Hillary Clinton. I hope the change will breathe new hope into the peace process, because if ever we needed hope, now is the time. The events in Gaza, which is such a small region, should never again be allowed to take place. That is the responsibility of all international actors in the scene. As we are short on time I will conclude.

[1083]Senator Ann Ormonde: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, and I am grateful for the opportunity to make a contribution on this awful crisis in the Middle East. As with everyone in the House and people throughout the country, I have been deeply shocked by the recent events in the Middle East and the impact they have had on the efforts to bring about peace. Ireland’s invasion of Gaza and its disproportionate——

Senator David Norris: I believe it was Israel.

Senator Ann Ormonde: I beg the Senator’s pardon.

Senator David Norris: I wish we would.

Senator Ann Ormonde: Israel’s invasion of Gaza and its disproportionate ground and air assaults have caused untold human misery, devastated local infrastructure and set back peace efforts, possibly by years. The devastation, tragedy and human misery brought by Israel’s disproportionate response to rocket attacks on its own people have severely damaged the cause of peace. The bombing of United Nations facilities within Gaza, including the attack on the local headquarters of the UN humanitarian effort, was completely unacceptable.

Some time ago I spoke with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin. The Minister and the Government were right to fully condemn these acts. The Minister called for an international investigation into the alleged violations of international humanitarian law, the shelling of United Nations schools and facilities, the attacks on humanitarian personnel, the reports of using civilians as human shields, and the alleged use by Israel of banned munitions. Will the Minister of State indicate if Israel used illegal weapons in Gaza? We have heard many reports on the matter and I seek the view of the Minister of State as to the impact if that is the case.

Hamas must also instruct its supporters to stop the shameful and indiscriminate rocket attacks on the people of Israel. Any investigation must also establish if Hamas gunmen used United Nations facilitates as a shield against the Israeli offensive. Such actions are also despicable as they put the men and women dedicated to delivering humanitarian assistance in the line of fire. It is vital that both sides show restraint at this stage.

I have spoken with the Minister, Deputy Martin, since the conflict and he has agreed that Ireland will maintain its strong support for peace in the region. I welcome that during the Christmas and New Year holidays the Minister, his Department and our diplomatic staff in the region continued to closely monitor events. They played a key role in ensuring that the EU response to the crisis was balanced. The Minister, Deputy Martin, has returned to the region since the Gaza crisis and had held meetings at the highest level in Syria and Lebanon, both of which are key players in the region. He has also held discussions with the Israeli ambassador in Dublin. During these discussions we have again emphasised the need for a halt to fighting by Israel and the Palestinians to allow genuine peace efforts to get under way in earnest.

I join the Government in welcoming the appointment by President Obama of Senator George Mitchell as his special envoy to the Middle East. More than any other country in the world, we know of Senator Mitchell’s commitment to peace. In the darkest days of the Troubles he showed patience and dogged determination to keep all sides at the negotiating table. I have no doubt these talents will have a positive impact in the Middle East. The fact that Senator Mitchell wasted no time in travelling to the region to assess the situation is a very welcome sign for the future. We owe the Senator a debt of gratitude in this country that can never be repaid. However, one small and practical way in which we could thank him is by actively supporting his efforts in the Middle East.

[1084]The European Union is the largest donor of aid to the Palestinian territories. The recent war has seen much of that in which we have invested bombed, smashed and destroyed. It is heartbreaking to see the work that Ireland supported bulldozed by tanks and bombed from the air. Ireland with its European partners must now re-examine how we can support the blockaded people of Gaza. It is important that the course of action decided upon is implemented to allow the men, women and children of Gaza receive support as soon as possible.

Ireland is participating fully in drawing up the EU response to the humanitarian needs of the region. I am assured the Government will be represented at key international meetings where the plans to rebuild Gaza will be discussed.

I pay tribute to the efforts of our diplomatic staff in Israel and Palestine. They worked to ensure the safety of approximately 20 Irish citizens and their families in Gaza. We must end the blockades, the siege of Gaza and the demolitions and evictions. We must open the borders to allow the delivery of building materials and humanitarian aid in the territory. There is no point in considering the past. We must look to the future and work out how to bring the two sides together. The only way forward is to get people around the table. We must encourage those involved to walk away from violence and show a real commitment to peace.

Will the Minister of State offer a view on how the Israeli elections will impact on the situation, given that there is a new President in the USA?

Senator Maurice Cummins: That is an easy question.

Senator David Norris: May I with unparalleled generosity award the last minute to my friend and colleague, Senator Bacik? The Minister of State is most welcome and I thank him for his courtesy in giving me the notes of his speech. I wish to say something about the context of this debate. It is very short and rushed. I am grateful to the Minister of State for being present. He is a person of substance and weight within Government and I hope he will carry back a message to his colleagues.

This debate is instead of the debate for which I asked. That was a debate which was originated by the motion I put to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, which was unanimously passed and which was sent to both the Dáil and the Seanad from the committee. I confirmed that from the ante room some five minutes before this debate occurred. I understand we will be taking that perhaps next week. That is the important motion and we must repass it. I accepted some of the amendments and some of the watering down. There were some elements I did not like in it, but that is the motion which refers to the war crimes and that is absolutely essential. We are strengthening the hands of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in looking for that in the continuing negotiations. I am most grateful to my colleague, Senator Cummins, for putting the text of that on the record of the House. This will not go away, it will be taken again next week.

The Minister of State’s speech, like the curate’s egg, was good in parts. We are trying a balancing act. It is a pity the Minister of State could not have attended the meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs last week to hear the distinguished Israeli historian, Professor Ilan Pappé, say we should avoid this attempt to be even-handed because it does violence to the real situation. We are always trying to balance and say on the one hand, the Israelis, and on the other, Hamas. It is not an equal situation. This is colonisation and the expulsion and attempted extirpation of an indigenous people.

When the Minister of State says he supports the upgrading of the Israeli trade agreements, I wonder have we learnt nothing. How can the Minister of State support that? That is where I [1085]part company with him. I know about EuroMed, the external trade association agreement between the European Union and the state of Israel which gives preferential treatment to the export of their goods. Human rights protocols are attached to that which are not even monitored. What is the point of them? It is a blasphemy against the concept of human rights to have them there on paper while at the beginning of his speech the Minister of State makes clear that he believes there is a prima facie case that Israel is involved in war crimes, only then to say he is supportive of upgrading the trade relations, perhaps in return for some political progress. What about human rights? If those protocols mean anything they should be examined now. Had the European Union done so it could have switched that war off in 15 minutes because it imports 75% of Israel’s agricultural produce. If we had threatened that the Israelis would have changed their tone. That is why it is indefensible they should be rewarded in this way.

The Minister of State complimented Egypt. I do not compliment Egypt; I condemn it. I was there and saw what the Egyptians were doing and the shameful way in which they stopped doctors from around the world going in and held them at the Rafah border crossing. They gassed the unfortunate people in those tunnels who brought in some arms but were also bringing in medical supplies, foodstuffs, aid of various kinds and money, the lifeblood which the Israelis were strangling out of them.

I am not anti-Semitic. No one could dare accuse me of being anti-Semitic. I had an apartment there for nearly 30 years. I lived with an Israeli Jew. I know all about it. I love the civilisation. What the Israeli Government is doing there is as much a blasphemy against Judaism and its respect for life as the American regime was a blasphemy against Christianity with Bush daring — presuming — to call himself a Christian in this matter.

We have a long way to go. There were difficulties. I laugh when I hear the Israelis say: “Why did they not use the greenhouses?” What rubbish. Even in the days of Yasser Arafat, when I was in Gaza, I saw the mounds of rotting fruit and vegetables because the Israelis had strangled the area. They will not let one blade of grass be exported. It is cynical hypocrisy for them to ask: “Why did they not use the greenhouses that we gave them?” They left them nothing that was not useless and insupportable. They are using new weapons, DIME munitions. It is unspeakable. I said this was a blitz and that it was like the Warsaw Ghetto. They do not like that but that is what it is. The Minister of State’s German colleagues are protecting the Israelis. I do not think the Palestinians should suffer because of the guilty conscience of the Germans. It is about time we said the Holocaust was a situation of unique horror and as such is the inheritance of all humanity. It is not the private possession of a corrupt Israeli Government to use as a shield to deflect criticism of its own gross abuses of human rights. I salute those within Israel who have had the enormous courage to stand up and the Jewish people who wrote a letter to The Irish Times. They are the people of great courage because it takes guts to criticise one’s own people.

Last autumn the Israelis knew they had to get in before Obama replaced Bush. Of course they knew they could use the situation for electoral purposes but there was a ceasefire involving Hamas, which was the legally elected government. Let us not hear about democracy unless we are able to accept internationally monitored elections. Last October, during the truce, the number of rockets had dropped from 373 to none, then the Israelis went in and murdered three people. That is what happened. I will leave it at that until next week.

Senator Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to Senator Norris for sharing his time. I regret the shortness of this debate. I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I appreciate the Government’s strong condemnation of the Israeli bombardment in Gaza. It has been important and good to see the Government standing up for the rights of the Palestinian people. It has been [1086]deeply distressing for all of us to witness the murder of 1,300 Palestinians, one third of whom were children, about whom there could be no doubt that they were civilians. It is important we continue to press at EU level, and any level we can, to insist on the condemnation of the Israeli aggression in Gaza.

Will the Minister of State continue to press for Israel’s accountability for its clear breaches of international law and its committing war crimes against the Palestinian people? There is no doubt Israel targeted UN schools and homes where civilians were taking shelter. Israel should be held accountable for that. Pressure must also be put on Israel through the downgrading of the preferential status of Israel’s trade agreements within the EU. Those trade agreements should be used to put pressure on Israel to maintain a ceasefire to allow access for doctors, medics and other people in and out of Gaza and to allow the construction and reparation there to continue.

Senator Dan Boyle: Last week, I spoke at a debate in the Trinity Historical Society as a last minute substitute against the motion that Israel’s actions were acceptable. I shared a platform with Steven Weinberg, a Nobel prize winning physicist. He is a nice man but he argued that Israel is a liberal sector democracy.

Unfortunately, the effect of Israel’s living in a constant state of siege and belligerence has been to dilute its democracy. The recent election results in Israel marking a swing to extreme right wing thinking is an effect of a failure to understand the military and technological advantage that it has as the sole democracy in that region. The humane approach to foreign policy would be the opposite of what has been happening in Gaza in recent months, and before that in southern Lebanon.

I welcome the strong position of the Government in articulating a viewpoint ahead of others. A clear signal is coming from this House that we, as the Government has articulated, believe this to be a one-sided situation that demands an appropriate response. The Government should use any opportunity it has to ensure that one-sidedness is overturned for the sake of humanity and justice.

Acting Chairman (Senator Feargal Quinn): The Minister of State has two minutes to speak.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: On a point of order, I object strongly. We did not finish the last debate until after 4 p.m. I know the Minister of State was here on time and was delayed in starting to speak. I watched the debate from my office and noted that he could not finish his contribution until 4.30 p.m. This makes a mockery——

Acting Chairman: We are finishing at 5 p.m.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: It makes a mockery——

Acting Chairman: I agree but that was the Order of Business we agreed.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: If we are to go away to prepare our contributions and come along to find out that we have half an hour of debate——

Acting Chairman: I accept that point but it is not a point of order.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: We have had half an hour of debate. I object in the strongest terms. I am very disappointed.

Acting Chairman: The Senator has made his objection and it has been heard.

[1087]Senator Dominic Hannigan: This shows no respect to people in this House who work to prepare their contributions.

Senator Ivana Bacik: Hear, hear. We had insufficient time.

Senator Maurice Cummins: We had insufficient time.

Acting Chairman: We agreed on the Order of Business this morning to conclude at 5 p.m. I am afraid the Minister of State has only a minute and a half left to speak.

5 o’clock

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Dick Roche): I too regret that the debate was not longer because it was a good debate. Senators raised specific issues which I will address. Senators Ormonde and Cummins touched on the issue of illegal weapons. There can be no doubt that weapons which are totally unacceptable were used. The evidence from John Ging, a former officer in the Irish Army, is indisputable. There was some equivocation and debate because there were no journalists or independent sources on site but we had an independent source, an Irish citizen with experience in the Army, representing the United Nations.

Senator David Norris: Al-Jazeera was there.

Deputy Dick Roche: He had no interest in telling anything but the truth. Senator Bacik followed up by asking whether the Irish Government will continue its position on that. It will do so, because the views of the UN Secretary General must be respected. It does not matter what the outcome is, but there must be an investigation as this weaponry is just not acceptable.

Senator Ormonde also asked about the Israeli elections. I fear that these elections will have an impact on the situation. Senator Norris rightly pointed out that the Israeli elections clearly had a significant impact on what we saw. There has been a general move to the right in Israel, and there has been some fragmentation. That is an internal Israeli matter, but it will have an impact.

Senator Norris’s suggestion that Ireland has been less than forceful on the issue of EU-Israeli relations rather misrepresents our position. Our position at the EU Council has always been that there must be a relationship between the improvement of EU-Israeli relations and Israeli activity in the area, and sometimes we have been on our own on this. I would like to see EU-Israeli relations improving because the precursor of that would be an improvement in the normalisation of relations between the Israelis and their neighbours.

Senator Donie Cassidy: I thank the Acting Chairman, the Minister of State and my colleagues in the House for participating in the debate. I will be proposing on the Order of Business next Thursday that we return to this serious matter, allowing colleagues to make a more lengthy contribution than the rushed effort we had today, which was not envisaged when I was ordering the business this morning. I apologise to everyone concerned in the House about this.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: Let us debate the roof cladding issue now, because that is vital.

Senator David Norris: I am grateful to the Leader for his generous and practical suggestion. Since I have received an undertaking from the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs that the motion was sent to the Dáil and Seanad Offices and will be sent again, will we take this proposal to support the Government’s position? That would be helpful in strengthening the Minister’s hand. I particularly want to do what the Minister of State said, which is to get accountability for this prima facie evidence. If everything is in order, could the Leader indicate that we will be taking this motion?

[1088]Acting Chairman: I imagine that is a position for the Whips to take, and I will leave it to the Leader to do so.

Senator Larry Butler: I move:

That Seanad Éireann commends the Government on its introduction of a national insulation programme aimed at tackling the legacy of poorly insulated homes, improving energy efficiency, reducing electricity costs, protecting vulnerable members of society and securing additional green employment opportunities.

The Government has announced a national insulation programme for economic recovery, which is part of our smart economy document. I welcome this announcement. I have done much work on the insulation programme which went through the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party, and I am glad that the Minister has now put some money behind it. This is a most important step.

Insulation deals with how we conserve energy in our houses and how we expend energy in our country. It costs us around €6 billion every year to import gas, oil and alternative energy. Anything we can do to make our houses more energy efficient is very important. The Government has now recognised that. This proposal can create between 7,000 and 20,000 jobs, and people will then start to realise what a programme it is. We have a commitment with the EU and under the Kyoto Protocol that we would reduce our CO2 emissions by 2013. If we did not take this action now, we would possibly end up paying about €250 million per year in carbon taxes after 2013. Therefore, this the right action to take.

We are also offering householders a generous contribution if they ensure that their houses are properly insulated. Not only are we providing them with an incentive, they will also save a substantial amount of money every year. Depending on the investment of between €10,000 and €20,000, they could save up to €1,000 every year, which is very substantial. This is also very important to the construction industry at a time of a big downturn. As we know, the construction industry played a major role in the Celtic tiger years, when the turnover in that industry was about €30 billion. In 2008, the renovation section of the construction industry had a turnover of €8.2 billion, even though the downturn had begun at that stage. We believe the new proposals will lead to another increase, from €8.2 billion to almost €10 billion. That will be welcomed by people in the construction industry. Direction and radical thinking are needed in the current economic climate. The insulation programme will save energy and money and create jobs. It will be confirmed that the Government’s assistance is to extend to those in private homes, those on low incomes and those in social housing. It is important to bear in mind that this scheme will not just be of benefit to middle-class people. Some €160 million will be spent across the economy. Some €60 million will be given to local authorities for the upgrading of schools’ insulation systems.

When the insulation and renovation programme has been completed, we will find that it is a small part of what needs to be done in the renewable energy sector as a whole. This proposal has been sanctioned by the Government because it realises that a substantial development needs to be completed. This is just the start of a programme of upgrading almost 1 million houses throughout the country. The programme will involve investment of €9 billion over many years. We should get it up and running as soon as possible. I ask the Minister of State to ensure that takes place. Many people are waiting until March. It is important for the Minister of State to ensure the programme is in operation as soon as possible. No work is being done in the renovation sector because people are waiting until March.

[1089]I draw the Minister of State’s attention to the fact that no allowance for double or treble glazing has been made in the programme. That is terribly important because there are many jobs in this area. It should be a key part of everything we do. When an inspector comes to make a building energy rating report, the first thing he does is check whether the house is draught-excluded and airtight. To do that, one must have very efficient windows. No provision has been made for this area in the scheme. It would be worthwhile to make such a provision. It would give this country’s window manufacturers a boost, thereby facilitating job creation, which is what we need. God knows that many jobs have been lost over recent months. When a scheme of this nature is being put in place, it is important to ensure we can get the maximum out of it.

I would like to speak about eligibility for this scheme. The scheme is aimed at older houses, which do not tend to be energy efficient. Such houses featured in the recent new homes scheme. In 2005-06, we increased the insulation requirements for the new housing stock that was being built at that time. The houses in question are very efficient at holding in heat. The best way to describe what we are trying to do is to compare it to putting a thermoflask over one’s house. We are trying to ensure no energy escapes. People need to get the very most out of their energy. Everybody knows that householders are currently spending up to 10% of their money on energy. This is one of the things we are trying to do to help them.

I will run through the various elements of the scheme. An allowance of €250 is available for roof insulation and €400 is available for cavity wall insulation. Some €2,500 is available for internal wall insulation and €4,000 is available for external wall insulation. An allowance of €700 is available in respect of high-efficiency boilers. The heating control and upgrade allowance is worth €500. If one wants to get an inspector to conduct an energy rating on one’s home, one can apply for an allowance of €200. That is a very good scheme. All that is missing is for provision to be made for double glazing. I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Power, to bring that to the attention of the Minister, Deputy Gormley.

First-time applicants who wish to participate in this scheme and avail of building energy rating inspections will be required to make a minimum investment. Such householders will get a minimum grant payment of €500. This means householders cannot qualify for the roof insulation grant, or the cavity wall insulation grant, without also getting other things done. I wish to comment on the figures issued by the Government. In the first year, €100 million will be spent on the——

Acting Chairman: The Senator has one minute remaining.

Senator Larry Butler: Has my time gone that quickly?

Acting Chairman: It has.

Senator Larry Butler: I think the old clock might be fast.

Acting Chairman: The two screens are telling me the same thing.

Senator Larry Butler: I wanted to comment further on some aspects of the scheme. I will use my last minute to speak about the important issue of renewables. I will wrap up quickly. We must encourage the use of renewables. I want the Minister of State to explain how grant aid will be made available in respect of renewables. Micro wind generators and solar energy panels are being developed in this country. A company in County Tipperary is producing a solar energy panel that can deliver electricity to one’s home. That is a good form of renewable energy. Wind operators are also useful. It is terribly important for the smart meter system to be brought into operation. If I had more time, I would speak about such matters as pellet [1090]boilers, biomass, thermal energy and low-energy bulbs. If one uses low-energy bulbs exclusively in one’s home, one will save €350 a year. That is a phenomenal amount of money to save just by changing one’s light bulbs. I will respect the Chairman by concluding. It is important we support the scheme under discussion, which will create a substantial number of jobs. It is the start of a major programme that might ultimately be worth €18 billion if we go down the renewables route. We will invest in insulation, of course.

Senator Martin Brady: It gives me great pleasure to second the motion that has been proposed by Senator Butler. I thank the Senator for bringing this matter before the House. I remember he first raised this issue at a meeting of the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party. Senator Butler, who has spent most of his life in the building industry, has a vast knowledge of and keen personal interest in this topic. I thank him for the generosity he has shown in taking the time to give his colleagues valuable advice on this subject. Whenever I went to him I was not found wanting. He has done thorough research on it and outlined what is involved in that.

The national insulation programme was launched on 8 February and as Senator Butler said, it involves a three-pronged approach. There will be many beneficial effects for people both inside and outside the industry, suppliers and so on. Senator Butler outlined the number of jobs the programme will create, which is important, and spoke about alternative energy projects such as solar panels. He explained to me on another occasion how that can be done. That will save consumers up to 50% in energy costs.

The public is very aware of the programme. I attended a meeting one night recently at which I distributed hand-outs on the programme. That was the document everybody wanted. There were 70 people at the meeting and I ran out of them. That indicates there is genuine interest in the programme and it has created an awareness among householders of savings on the cost of energy.

We raised the cost of gas with the Minister in the House last week — people’s bills doubled after Christmas — and the cost of electricity. That has an impact on small businesses in particular. They have found it very difficult to continue in business due to the constraints being put on them by the high cost of energy, and electricity in particular.

I welcomed the news yesterday that Bord Gáis is reducing its charges and has entered into a programme for electricity supply. Senator O’Reilly said last week that Bord Gáis should be in a competitive position in terms of electricity supply. I do not know if the Senator had inside information but it announced that this morning. That is welcome news and it was necessary for that to be done.

As the Senator outlined also, a great deal of energy is wasted in homes which people are only realising now. It can be lost through the roof due to inadequate insulation. There is insulation in houses for the past 50 or 60 years that was never upgraded. Lagging jackets is another issue. Even in my home I notice there is not a proper lagging jacket on the boiler. Energy efficient bulbs are available which last 50 times longer than standard bulbs. They are cheaper and they use less electricity. All those areas are embodied in this measure.

Another matter about which Senator O’Reilly and myself often speak is alternative energy, which is connected to this issue. In other countries households provide their own electricity by way of windmills. Senator O’Reilly told me it is costly to maintain them but these are the areas we should examine. We should examine the possibility of harnessing our rivers and streams——

Senator Joe O’Reilly: Hear, hear.

[1091]Senator Martin Brady: ——which years ago powered tanneries, corn mills and so on and provided employment for a large number of people. Those facilities still exist and we should examine the possibility of progressing that issue. We have to get back to that type of operation. It is beneficial on three fronts. It will create jobs and be good for the climate and for the people in that our natural resources will be harnessed and put to the best use possible.

I thank the Senator for bringing forward the motion.It is good to see somebody utilise their knowledge, skills and talent and on this occasion Senator Butler comes up well above the mark in that regard.

Senator Joe O’Reilly: Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after “Seanad Éireann” and substitute the following:

“notes the promised introduction of an insulation scheme; regrets the delay in opening applications for this insulation scheme; and condemns the Government for not providing adequate resources for long established schemes such as housing aid for the elderly and housing adaptation grants for the disabled.”

This amendment identifies the central weaknesses of the proposition before the House and condemns the nature of the organisation of this scheme, the lack of funding and the lack of coherence in terms of existing schemes.

This scheme has been badly organised. This Government appears to have lost its touch because while the scheme is good in principle, and nobody objects to the principle because we have all called for it, including some of my colleagues, it has been presented and organised very badly. It was a major mistake to leave a time gap between the announcement of the scheme and the beginning of applications at the end of March because people are putting insulation work on hold. A Member of the Dáil told me yesterday that in one area in County Waterford, and my colleague Senator Coffey would be familiar with this, ten jobs have been lost because there is no activity in the supply of insulation materials. That is a serious development.

In the county that my good friend, Senator Brady, and myself hail from, County Cavan, Kingspan is one of the best employers in the area. It is a well organised company which is run by the Murtagh family. That firm is now experiencing a stand still in activity in the insulation area. That was a major error on the part of the Government. It is a disgrace and is something that should not have happened. To be fair, it is not Senator Butler’s fault but it is a systems failure in that there should not be a time gap between the announcement and the implementation of the scheme. Strategies should have been put in place to prevent that. This time gap is causing unemployment at a time when construction is in a terrible state — it is at a standstill. It is a very serious matter.

The Minister must try to do something to shorten the period to the very minimum. I acknowledge that Senator Butler’s point made earlier was that we must shorten that gap because it is wrong. The Minister should do two things. He should first accept that a blunder has been made and that it is a systems failure and, second, apologise Obama style. Having apologised, he should then affirm to us that he will go back to his Department and at dawn tomorrow he will begin a process of implementing the scheme as a priority within a few days. It is a disgrace that this has happened and a shocking indictment of Government. It is up to the Minister to apologise and set a process of correction in place.

This scheme is very important for the construction industry because up to 37,000 jobs were lost in January and there are 326,000 people unemployed throughout the country; we have some projections also in that regard. The construction industry needs a boost. Not only do we [1092]need to insulate houses but we must insulate schools, to which reference is made, and initiate a full programme of school refurbishment and building.

When we consider the cost of jobseeker’s allowance, the amount of money that goes back into the economy in terms of VAT receipts and taxation, the cost of prefabricated buildings for schools and the reduced cost of contract work, it would be almost cost neutral to have an insulation scheme for schools. In that sense this programme it is to be welcomed as a boost for the construction industry.

I want to raise an issue which the Minister of State might respond to when replying. It is shocking that we are not honouring the housing aid for the elderly scheme and the disabled persons’ grants. Those schemes have been stopped in my county and in a number of other counties owing to a lack of funding. A Minister — I am not sure whether it was the Minister of State — gave a disingenuous answer in the Dáil. He stated that it was up to the local authority to provide 20% of the funding and to determine the amount of money to be spent on housing aid for the elderly and for the disabled grant scheme. County Cavan, as elsewhere, has the funding locally and is prepared to dedicate local funding of 20% but it lacks the crucial 80%. That is why that leg is in our motion. It is very important we implement housing aid for the elderly and the essential repairs grant. Those two schemes are first cousins of an insulation scheme. The windows issue would be dealt with within the essential repairs grant and it is very important that this would happen.

I welcome the scheme in principle and the allocation made to it but I repeat that a mess has been made in its implementation. There is a problem at present with fuel poverty. The Economic and Social Research Institute determines that fuel poverty exists if a family spends more than 10% of its income on fuel. There are now 300,000 people experiencing fuel poverty. An insulation scheme and a back-up programme are obviously important. For this reason, housing aid for the elderly and the essential repairs grants are vital. We must have a response to these points.

I would like to be able to go back to the members of Cavan County Council tomorrow and tell them I was told in the Seanad today that there will be a proper response and that the essential repairs grant and housing aid for the elderly will be implemented as a matter of urgency. I would like to say the same to colleagues in other county councils. Senator McFadden spoke about County Westmeath in similar terms recently. Such a response would take care of the windows issue.

I am in favour of the building energy rating and I welcome the grant for it. This is very important in the context of Kyoto fines. It is very important we do not waste money unnecessarily, either buying carbon credits or paying Kyoto fines. That is money going out of the country. It is not productive expenditure and we should not be paying it.

I accept the points that were made very well and very articulately by Senator Brady concerning alternative and green energy. Those initiatives are, of course, parallel with this one. This scheme is good in principle but we need to add a number of points. It must be initiated immediately and the banks must come on side to lend to people. I ask the Minister of State to what degree he is in proper and firm negotiations with the banks so that there may be a positive response to householders who will try to use the scheme. I hope there will be quality control on the scheme. I ask the Minister of State to respond to this point too. We must monitor how attractive the scheme is and change or tweak it as necessary. I believe there will be a high uptake but am a little concerned that the grant aid may be on the low side. A little more might be needed to kick-start it. One hopes it will work because it is vital it does. I look forward to [1093]the Minister of State’s apology and to his assurances that he will get the scheme going within 48 hours——

Senator Larry Butler: The Senator should not hold his breath.

Acting Chairman: We will give the Minister of State a few moments. I call on Senator Dan Boyle.

Senator Joe O’Reilly: Senator Boyle can apologise too.

Senator Dan Boyle: I believe I have finished doing that today.

Senator Joe O’Reilly: The Senator has been doing a great deal of that lately.

Senator Dan Boyle: I second and commend today’s motion. It must be acknowledged that we live in difficult fiscal times and difficult decisions have been made to pare back very important public expenditure programmes. The Government has made a conscious decision that one area where additional expenditure will be and must be made available is in home insulation. As other speakers have commented, there are cumulative benefits for adopting this approach. In announcing the scheme the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, pointed out this scheme has the potential to produce 4,000 jobs that are badly needed in the current climate.

In addressing the issue of poorly insulated housing stock the scheme will also be a significant contributor in reducing our Kyoto liabilities in carbon costs. On those grounds alone it would be a very welcome programme. However, it is structured in a multifaceted way. The home energy saving scheme is only one of a series of programmes that exist now, from the original greener homes programme to the warmer homes programme. This scheme exists at a number of levels. There is a level for private householders and another level where funding is to be provided by Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government for local authority housing stock. Money is being spent in the Department of Education and Science to ensure much of our public school building stock, which is utilised by our young people every day, achieves the highest possible energy standards. There will be multiple benefits from following this programme.

We must place the scheme in the context of policy on energy conservation. This, again, exists on a wider level. The Government has offered incentives to businesses to acquire energy efficient equipment. Grants are available for the generation of electricity by renewable sources. There is particular support for new technology in energy generation. In the past we failed to press home a natural advantage in respect of technology to harness wind. We will be able to do so with wave and tidal power. In all these ways the scheme is a good news story in an era when all too sadly we lack good news. I hope the Opposition will recognise this. An amendment was tabled but I believe the House should support this motion as it is. I do not see anything particularly contentious in it. The motion points out that the scheme, as structured, will deal with insulation in its wider sense and will show how roofing, exterior walls, and flooring can be used by householders to save on their energy bills.

We are in the middle of a political debate about energy costs in this country. I am confident the Government, through the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, is making the appropriate decisions in this regard. On another level, we should also use today’s debate to talk about not only what is being achieved in the home energy savings scheme but to place it as a linchpin in a series of economic initiatives to be adopted in coming years with regard to reinventing and restoring economic strength in this country. I and my party believe that the economy will not be restored by what was seen to have worked in the past. Reincen[1094]tivising the housing market will not work. We must look at the 1 million houses we already have in our housing stock and see to what extent we can make them energy efficient and how we can create a new market where houses will be bought not only for their location but because of their energy efficiency. When we achieve that we will see how programmes and policies such as this can be successful.

On those grounds, today’s debate should be less contentious than those we usually conduct during Private Members’ Business. This is one of the better news stories in terms of Government policies and I commend the motion to the House.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I disagree fundamentally with Senator Boyle.

Acting Chairman: I ask Senator Coffey to second the amendment formally and to reserve his right to speak at a later time.

Senator Paudie Coffey: I second the amendment and I reserve the right to speak later.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I find this to be an extraordinarily divisive motion. I can barely speak and hold my breath dealing with it because I am so angered. I have no problem with my colleague on the other side of the House who was not present, who joined this House only in 2007 and who can hold no responsibility for the things I will mention now. I am angered that Fianna Fáil would dare table a motion aimed at tackling the legacy of poorly insulated homes. The motion says the programme is “aimed at tackling the legacy of poorly insulated homes”. I have my speech from 2006. I could also get my speeches from 2004 and 2003. This problem has been created since 1998 with this Government refusing to implement the insulation requirements clearly coming down the road from the European Community. We acted disgracefully in the Dublin area for those ten years. Since 1998 more than 250,000 houses have been built in Dublin with hollow blocks that would not be used to build cow sheds in counties Kerry, Cork, Waterford or the rest of Munster and would not get HomeBond insurance in those counties. I stand to be corrected but I have checked this time and again. From his background Senator Butler will be well aware that it is extraordinarily difficult to retro-insulate a hollow block house. I built my house in 1971 with hollow walls and it was very easy to retro-insulate that by filling the space between the walls. The Acting Chairman, Senator Phelan, knows well that if one were to try to fill all the holes in hollow blocks one would have to put a million holes in the side of one’s wall.

At that time I brought forward a motion, supported by Fine Gael and seconded by former Senator Brian Hayes, to congratulate Fingal County Council on being the first local authority in the Dublin area to introduce the proper standards. The Minister should know that this row went on for ten years. Mr. Gerard McCaughey of Century Homes led the debate on this. He got no hearing from anybody except the Green Party. It was interesting to hear Senator O’Reilly refer to Kingspan, which somewhere along the way bought Century Homes. The company is still at the leading edge of the home building industry in terms of floor, wall and roof insulation and is doing an extraordinary job.

In this city tonight there are young couples who are worried not only about their income levy, pension levy or losing their jobs but for the next 30 years will be paying off houses that will never reach the level of insulation required. If they ever want to sell them on they will lose money. It is a disgrace. I said it two years ago and I will say it now: people should be sacked for it. It is all on the record, every bit of it. In no way do I hold Senator Butler responsible for it. I have raised these issues in the House time and again since 2000. I asked that the Govern[1095]ment bring forward the European directive. When the Government saw it coming down the road it did nothing about it.

When it had to do it, the Government brought forward its own proposal so that Ireland developed a new way of measuring energy efficiently to do with heat loss through the roof as opposed to the international standard, namely the cost per annum to heat a cubic metre of space, which is what it should be. The Government rejected that and Ministers came to the House and argued with me that there was no need to do this. Looking back ten years later we know the difference. What we have done over that period is a disgrace. We have condemned young people to live in sub-standard houses on which they will never recoup their investment. This is completely unnecessary.

The Green Party held this view all along. It was only a month in Government when it implemented this. If it never does anything else, it got that implemented. We examined getting derogations from it and trying to avoid implementing it. The last time I said that in October 2006 a Minister of State in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government went on “Prime Time” and said the reason it was not done was that it would add to the cost of houses for young people. The cost at that stage to bring in the standard of insulation we require, an “A” building energy rating or whatever, would have been €800. Members should listen to this debate again and the amounts of money we are talking about. This €800 would have saved all this money at this stage. Talk about bad economics and decisions and burying people in sub-standard housing. It is a disgrace and it was all in front of us.

It is not as if we did not know. We saw it happening. We argued across the floor in this House. The Government side voted against this two short years ago and earlier. In a Private Members’ motion we demanded that the Government take immediate action and it went against it. Regrettably, hundreds of thousands of existing houses with poor energy efficiency, such as hollow block built homes, will have a lower energy rating and, consequently, a lower resale value. Home owners will continue to pay more every year for the heating of those homes and the repayments while the homes lose value. Fianna Fáil voted against that two years ago. We could see it happening in front of us.

I do not blame builders for this. Builders are long enough in the game to build to the regulations and do only what they need to do to build and sell a house. I blame the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government with the collusion of Government. It is the most disgraceful thing that has happened in the environment area in the past ten years. It happened in front of our eyes. The Government was reminded time and again. I saw Mr. McCaughey on television many times. I discussed it with him two or three times. Deputy Gormley, as an Opposition Deputy for the Green Party, raised it time and again. I saw the sums being done and it being priced. I saw the international movement and the different moves we made here to get out of it. I had many arguments with then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, on it in the House and outside and no attempt was made to do it.

The Cathaoirleach will understand why I am less than enthusiastic about what Senator Boyle referred to as an uncontroversial motion. There is nothing whatever wrong with Senator Butler’s points and I have no problem with them. I have a problem with this idea that the world began tonight. This was sitting in front of us for ten years and we walked away from it. We refused to deal with it. We have condemned people to sub-standard conditions, high payments, etc. There are companies that have done everything to try to get it right. Companies such as Century Homes and Kingspan led the way on this and fought for it. It created a major and unnecessary row between timber framed and concrete homes. There is no reason concrete [1096]homes could not be properly insulated. We refused to deal with these issues and that is why I would feel hypocritical supporting the motion.

Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Seán Power): I very much welcome this motion and thank Senators Butler and Brady for their support and endeavours in tabling it. I acknowledge the contributions from the other side and Senator O’Reilly’s support. He is a little critical of the timing but in general he is very supportive of what is proposed.

The national insulation programme for economic recovery, launched by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Ryan and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, on 8 February is a progressive and economically prudent programme aimed at substantially addressing the legacy of older housing with poor standards of energy efficiency. It is fitting and right that we discuss the matter in this House. While the programme offers many advantages to various sectors, and I will go on to highlight these, it is important to note that this programme has been crafted following much considered input over time from different Departments, State agencies, local authorities, local energy agencies, community-based organisations and, not least, following well-founded, well-researched input from many Members across all parties in these Houses.

Energy policy, above any other, should be a model for cross-party consensus. Ireland’s relatively remote geographical position means it is incumbent upon us all to develop visionary yet simple, collaborative rather than compromised, energy policies that will allow us to safeguard our security of energy supply in the face of uncertain and volatile world markets. It is our collective duty to protect the vulnerable members of our society for whom the cost of heating their homes is a significant burden. This programme is a major step forward in tackling this issue. Even for those on average means, the cost of installing measures to improve the energy efficiency of their homes can be a significant barrier to wider take-up. This financial barrier to a wider uptake in measures has been a prohibitive factor for too long. Again, this programme tackles this issue head-on.

The national insulation programme for economic recovery is essentially a three-pronged approach to addressing the legacy of older housing with poor energy efficiency standards. The home energy saving scheme is the largest element of the programme. The pilot programme, which Sustainable Energy Ireland undertook last year and which tested the business case for State support to householders upgrading their homes’ energy efficiency, found that there was a sound business case and a considerable appetite for such a scheme. The Government has responded by allocating a budget of €50 million in 2009.

This scheme has the potential to support the up-grade of in excess of 27,500 homes in 2009. Sustainable Energy Ireland estimates that demand for this scheme could ultimately exceed 100,000 homes. Home owners can expect to save up to €700 per year on their energy bills if they install the full suite of measures available under the scheme. The scheme offers grants of up to 40% of the typical cost of energy efficiency upgrade measures. The full range of measures and the associated grant level is as follows: roof insulation —€250; cavity wall insulation —€400; internal wall insulation —€2,500; external wall insulation —€4,000; high efficiency boiler with heating controls upgrade —€700; heating controls upgrade only —€500; and building energy rating assessment —€200.

Obviously, home owners will have to part-finance the work carried out. I call upon the country’s lending institutions and energy service companies to associate themselves with the scheme and offer innovative, competitive solutions to what will be a very significant market. A question was asked about the banks coming on board and providing the necessary funds. That [1097]is one of the issues that was discussed with the banks in the recent negotiations and I understand that significant funds will be provided specifically for this purpose.

The scheme has been launched now to allow installers who wish to participate in the scheme to register with SEI. Registered contractors are required to sign up to a code of conduct and comply with a range of terms and conditions to ensure the quality of work carried out under the scheme. They will also have to carry a specified level of insurance and be fully tax compliant. Sustainable Energy Ireland will implement a quality assurance and inspection programme to ensure compliance with these requirements. This scheme is a wonderful opportunity for contractors, electricians, plumbers and labourers to maintain and create employment. Sustainable Energy Ireland is now inviting calls from anyone wishing to register as contractors on the scheme to contact it on 1850 927000 or at hescontractor@sei.ie.

The scheme itself will be open to anybody owning a house that was built prior to 2006, and home owners and landlords will be able to apply under the scheme from next month. In the meantime, home owners can now register their interest with SEI on 1850 927000 or at hes@sei.ie. Home owners may also arrange to have a building energy rating carried out immediately if they wish, but this is not a requirement for participation in the scheme. However, it is important to note that home owners should not take action on the other measures until they have received grant approval from Sustainable Energy Ireland.

The second element of the national insulation programme for economic recovery — the warmer homes scheme — is designed to assist private households on low incomes, such as those in receipt of fuel allowance and invalidity or disability benefit. The Government is committed to protecting vulnerable consumers from the impact of high energy costs through a combination of institutional supports and investment in improving the energy efficiency of the housing stock. In recent years 20,000 homes have been substantially upgraded by the warmer homes scheme. In 2009, €20 million has been made available to the scheme. This greatly increased level of funding is expected to support energy efficiency interventions in up to 15,000 low income homes in this year alone.

Sustainable Energy Ireland, in consultation with the ESB, Bord Gáis and other interested parties, is reviewing the operation of the scheme with the aim of ensuring that maximum impact is delivered from the enhanced funding. The scheme provides for the installation of a range of energy efficiency measures, including cavity wall insulation, attic insulation, boiler lagging jackets, draught proofing measures and energy efficient lighting. Advice is also provided to householders on minimising energy use. The warmer homes scheme provides these measures free or at a nominal cost to the householder.

There are 20 community-based organisations currently delivering the warmer homes scheme, which represents just over two thirds of the country. Under an initiative to extend the scheme nationwide in 2009, Sustainable Energy Ireland plans to commence the introduction of new community-based organisations to the scheme from the end of March 2009. A number of improvements to the warmer homes scheme are gradually being introduced in this quarter, including a new freefone service designed to assist eligible home owners in identifying their nearest provider. If outside of current coverage, their details will be recorded and notified as soon as the service becomes available in their area. In addition, a new website will be launched to allow home owners, neighbours and relatives to find out more information about the warmer homes scheme and other grant schemes available in their area. Further information on the warmer homes scheme is available by calling 1800 250204 or by e-mailing warmerhomes@sei.ie or by visiting www.sei.ie.

In terms of institutional supports for vulnerable energy users, last year the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, established an interdepartmental group led by his Department and the Depart[1098]ment for Social and Family Affairs, which also includes the Departments of Finance, the Taoiseach, the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, and Health and Children, the Commission for Energy Regulation, SEI, the ESB, Bord Gáis and the Institute of Public Health. This intensive co-operation and co-ordinated working by all the relevant Departments, agencies and the utilities ensures the effective delivery of a comprehensive approach to addressing energy affordability.

The interdepartmental group has been conducting a series of meetings with representative groups and agencies, including Age Action Ireland and Energy Action, in addition to relevant groups and agencies in Northern Ireland. The group has finalised an advisory booklet to inform and assist those seeking advice about supports relating to energy affordability. The booklet will be published this month alongside a new complementary website and will be widely disseminated.

The third element of the national insulation programme for economic recovery will involve providing similar energy efficiency upgrade measures in social housing. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will make further announcements on this element of the programme in due course.

The national insulation programme for economic recovery has the potential to contribute to the creation of 4,000 direct and indirect jobs, thus contributing to the Government’s priority objective of maintaining and creating employment. The programme affords us the opportunity to substantially address the energy efficiency shortcomings in our homes. By availing of the many measures on offer, we can save energy, significantly reduce our energy costs, maintain and increase comfort levels in our homes and play a part in reducing Ireland’s CO2 emissions. By being more energy efficient, we can use less energy and ensure a greater security of supply in the future. Under this national insulation programme we will use less energy but, importantly, in the current difficult economic circumstances, we will help foster the growth of a new green energy sector that can ultimately employ many thousands of people.

6 o’clock

The benefits of the scheme are obvious. Most people will use less energy and, as a result, spend less money. Home owners will be warmer and will have reduced electricity bills. I have also mentioned the employment aspect. We expect up to 4,000 jobs to be created as a result of the scheme. Apart from those obvious benefits, I must mention the awareness this will create among people. For a long time people have been unaware of the energy they use in their homes and the habits they have developed over the years, many of them bad. The introduction of smart metering will be a great education. Its roll-out has not happened as quickly as we would wish but the indications are that as a result of providing people with smart meters they almost immediately change their habits. The times they consume electricity change and they become more conscious of their use of energy. The roll-out of smart meters to homes throughout the country will create a significant change and a major reduction in the use of electricity.

Mention was made of renewables. We all are much wiser now. It is not that long ago when we saw the price of oil increase to $147 a barrel and it has certainly changed the focus of people. Our future is very much in renewable energy and much of our attention in recent times has gone into developing the technologies and assisting people in the creation of new renewables. We have set ourselves ambitious targets for the use of renewable energy and much progress has been made.

As an island nation, we are dependent on foreign countries for the importation of our energy needs. We import over 90% of our energy. Apart from being dependent on other countries, we do not have much control over the cost of energy. As a result, energy, whether it be for [1099]use in homes or in business, is a big factor and we are certainly at a disadvantage in comparison to many other countries. For that reason we have placed enormous focus on the area of developing renewables and assisting people in developing alternatives to gas and oil.

The national energy efficiency action plan, which the Minister, Deputy Ryan, will publish shortly, will map out how Ireland will achieve energy savings of 20% across our economy by 2020. These savings will be achieved by a combination of policy interventions across all sectors. The national insulation programme is indicative of the robust economically sound policies included in the plan. It is by the implementation of the national energy efficiency plan that Ireland’s energy future will be shaped and safeguarded.

I am confident that all Members of this House will back this process now by actively promoting and supporting the national insulation programme.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Power, to the House. I also welcome this sensible cost-effective creative scheme, which nobody in this House should oppose. Beyond that, this motion is a waste of time. As Senator O’Toole mentioned, we have been talking about this for a long time. Indeed, we have probably debated this matter to death, not just in this House but in the other House as well. While I am pleased to see the introduction of the home energy saving scheme, the country might be better served if we debated issues of greater importance today. Earlier I was interrupted in mid-flow by the guillotining of the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2008. Then we did not have enough time to speak about the crisis in the Middle East, in Gaza, where today the bombing by Israeli aeroplanes has recommenced. Instead we must debate something that, as I stated, we have debated on numerous occasions in the past.

The Labour Party has been calling for a scheme such as this for many years and we are happy to see it introduced. In November last, at my party’s annual conference in Kilkenny, I called for the introduction of a similar scheme. I referred to the scheme being introduced in the UK to take people off the unemployment list and to reduce greenhouse gas and CO2 emissions. Until now we in Ireland were more or less sitting on our hands. We could have done much more. I am glad to see the introduction of this measure at last. It is good to see initiatives like this being rolled out in an effort to address not only CO2 emissions but unemployment.

I note the Minister of State stated that “energy policy, above any other, should be a model for cross-party consensus”. I stated on many occasions in this House that the Labour Party will not challenge or obstruct sensible solutions to national problems and I reaffirm that commitment. Certainly we will not stand in the way of this policy because we believe it will work.

I note the Minister of State expects the scheme to produce 4,000 jobs, directly and indirectly, and that must be welcomed. We need to see the introduction of more schemes like this.

In July last year, Sustainable Energy Ireland released a report stating that the average Irish household consumes 27% more energy than the average UK household, and 31% more than the average European Union household. The report found that household fuel use decreased by less than 0.5% from 1995 to 2006 while at the same time the average electricity use per person increased by an enormous 62%. A national insulation drive is a first step in addressing the household energy crisis we are facing and other follow-on initiatives will be necessary to ensure we tackle the issue of energy.

It makes sense to seal in the energy escaping from our houses but it is disappointing that the scheme does not extend to renewal and replacement of windows, particularly single glazed windows. Even in an optimally insulated home heat will continue to escape through the windows and cracks that appear, and this scheme sets out no specific provision to address that.

[1100]Recently the urban institute in University College Dublin exhibited a sensory detection programme which it developed. It uses a specialised thermal-imaging camera to conduct an audit of the built environment. One can go around a room with the camera to identify exactly where heat is escaping. It is a useful tool to allow us to rectify the position and put remedial measures in place. Its findings show consistently that one of the main causes of heat escape is through windows, mostly single glazed windows. The Minister must make home insulation schemes the first port of call in a journey towards preventing the escape of energy from homes.

On the subject of investing in research, this is exactly the kind of initiative that should be developed by the innovation community. In five years’ time the Government will have spent approximately €1 billion in promoting research in Ireland and it is essential that projects that will facilitate sustainable policies for national recovery are supported. The urban institute at University College Dublin and the environmental research institute at University College Cork are national centres of excellence in this field and it is important that policy is influenced by the research going on there. I note the Minister of State mentioned the issue of smart meters. I agree this could help to reduce energy use by people and I welcome their introduction by the energy companies.

I ask the Minister to use his offices to highlight that measures such as the new smart meters and allowing people to pay their bills on-line lead to a reduction in the costs of operation for these electricity companies, yet they do not seem to be passing these savings on to customers. I ask him to use his offices to call on the electricity companies to pass on these savings. In the UK, for instance, some of the energy companies, as a result of electronic billing, managed to pass on savings of up to 10% to their customers and I would encourage electricity companies to do the same here.

Until now it could have been argued that there was a lack of synergy when it came to making policy in this country. Successive Governments have invested enormous sums in research and it is important to ensure that any research developed is put into practice so that we have practical solutions that can be used. Tackling these problems presents an opportunity to get all sectors of society moving together in search of solutions. Tax breaks and start-up grants should be increased and fast-tracked in the direction of entrepreneurs and inventors working in this field.

Recently it was announced that the market for solar collectors has increased by 300% in the ten years to 2008 and it has reached approximately €1 billion. The next company such as Google or Nokia is most likely to be in this renewable and sustainable energy sector. That company may not necessarily come from Helsinki or Silicon Valley, it could quite easily come from some part of Ireland. We have the education and we have the drive. For instance, last month a company in Mayo created 20 jobs by developing a hyper-efficient solar-panel collector system. We have the technology and we have the commitment to do that.

There is no reason Ireland cannot benefit from the coming green revolution, but to do so we need to invest at grassroots and to encourage and develop this kind of industry through tax breaks. Amidst all the doom and gloom, it is not a sin to be hopeful about the future. These are the opportunities that may see us through these bad times.

Senator Paudie Coffey: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and am pleased to have the opportunity to debate this motion. I understand to a degree Senator O’Toole’s frustration because he was a Member of the House a long time before me. However, he is not the first to advocate programmes such as this. Many years ago I heard people advocating the need for better insulation in our homes, attics and so on. Almost 20 years ago I can remember the ESB taking the initiative and including leaflets in its billing system on this type of activity to [1101]help energy ratings in the home. It was asking people to put lagging jackets on hot water cylinders, insulate attics and even doing special offers in ESB shops. I remind Members that this is not a new idea and that we are coming late to the table with this initiative. What is being proposed is a remediation programme which, the motion says, is aimed at “tackling the legacy of poorly insulated homes”.

The Government alone is responsible for that legacy over the past ten to 20 years when the housing boom saw unprecedented levels of building in this country. It now has the audacity to say it is introducing a programme to deal with that legacy. Let us be honest about the fact that we have neglected our duties as Government and regulators of the building sector. We have neglected the opportunities, now well gone, to have insulated properly the many thousands of homes that were built. We are playing catch-up. I understand from the motion that the Government expects to have its back clapped, but I will not be doing that because it neglected the situation when it should have been addressed many years ago. It is not for the want of people telling the Government about it.

None the less, I welcome the principle of the grant scheme whereby people in sub-standard homes with heat going out the doors and windows will have an opportunity to deal with that issue. The amount of fuel poverty in Ireland is now widely recognised. I am aware of local authorities that introduced schemes where oil boilers and central heating systems were installed. Now I hear horror stories about some of these boilers being taken out and sold. People are selling the oil in the tanks because they cannot afford to burn it.

Waterford Stanley in my constituency was under serious pressure before Christmas and putting the staff on a three-day week. Now it has gone back on full-time work, which I welcome, because it makes solid fuel burners. Owing to the demand for solid fuel now, people are switching off their oil-dependent appliances and moving to solid fuel to heat the rooms they spend their time in. That is reality and here we are introducing insulation schemes at a very late date.

The scheme is broken down into three strands, according to the Minister of State. One is to cut heating bills, the second is to reduce carbon emissions and the third is to create jobs, all of which are to be welcomed. I have spoken already about some of the heating impacts. To reduce carbon emissions, a major job of work must be done because of the building energy rating that has been introduced. Again, that is late to the table because many of the agencies, even the local authorities, are not sure who the assessors are who will monitor this work, whether there are enough of them and if the public is fully aware of how they may be accessed. There is work to be done in trying to improve matters there.

As regards the warmer homes scheme and local authority housing, the Minister of State might clarify some of the confusion. The scheme is meant to apply, he says, to low income private homes and also to rented local authority housing. There is no mention of local authority housing qualifying for this particular grant on the Sustainable Energy Ireland website. The website says it applies to low income households or those on a social welfare allowance. There is no mention of local authority housing. My local authority was questioned on this recently and it was unable to answer. Senators are quite right in saying this scheme was announced without proper information and without the resources to engage properly with those required to assist in the working of the scheme. More work must be done in that regard because the message is incoherent and seems to be very disorganised.

Of course, there are the delays in the scheme whereby we are being told it is to be introduced in March and the industry is waiting, as is the public, on those who know about the scheme. These are unnecessary delays and should be dealt with as soon as possible.

[1102]Under the existing schemes in local authorities, especially those such as housing aid for the elderly and housing adaption grants, many people took the opportunity to insulate while houses were being renovated. I need not tell the Minister of State as a public representative how over-subscribed those schemes and grants are. In the summer of 2008 local authorities were closing the schemes because they had no more funding either from central government or their own resources to conclude and finish those grant applications that were in place. We are not properly resourcing them and that creates a problem.

People mentioned smart metering. This is a great idea but the roll-out is much too slow. Why are we taking so long since its announcement to see smart metering installed in the pilot areas? That programme needs to be speeded up. It will help raise awareness and give householders a better idea about energy usage in their homes.

We oppose the motion because we believe the Government is coming late to the table. It is introducing a remediation package which we welcome, but the legacy of this Government over the past ten to 15 years when there was an unprecedented housing boom meant that building standards were not properly regulated. Now, at a later stage, we are trying to remediate all that, to pump insulation into cavities and attics, when it should have been done long before. Many people had been advocating this for many years. I can go back 20 years when the ESB leaflets were going into every house along with the bills. However, the Government turned a blind eye and took no notice.

Senator Nicky McFadden: I welcome the Minister of State to the House. As I have said before, I find it funny that Senator Butler is commending the Government in any motion at this stage considering the mess it has made of everything. None the less, I believe the Senator’s heart is in the right place. He has worked for a long time on this scheme. I would have asked the same questions last week that I am going to ask now when, to tremendous applause, the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Ryan, was on the six o’clock news on Sunday evening, with the guys running in behind him with the radiators. It looked as if the whole system was in place, but unfortunately that is not the case and it took three days before anything appeared on the website of Sustainable Energy Ireland, which I believe is the organisation that will look after the scheme.

The first question on people’s lips is about reducing their energy bills and they welcomed this grant. I acknowledge that the Green Party has come up with a positive initiative but Fine Gael has been highlighting the problem for a long time. I was at a loss to advise people how they could apply because information is not yet available on the scheme. People will have to find the money to pay for the improvements and claim the grant retrospectively but there is little surplus cash available for people to extend themselves in this manner. I hope the delays experienced thus far in regard to funding will not become an issue.

[1103]I have been shouting loudly at Westmeath County Council for disabled persons grants, essential repairs grants and heating for the elderly grants. I am aware of one elderly man who has been waiting two years for a grant. Even though it is now the middle of February, the county council has not yet prepared its budget for 2009, let alone decide how it will fund essential repairs and other grants.

This “la-di-da” scheme is worthwhile but, like everything else introduced by this Government, it is not backed up by common sense. It is not a radical idea because it is logical that we should strive to reduce our carbon footprint and help people to save money while keeping warm. As spokesperson for social and family affairs, I am acutely aware of the number of elderly people who are experiencing fuel poverty and who must decide between buying bread and butter or a bale of briquets. Does the Minister know the price of a bale of briquets? It costs a lot of money. We should provide people who fall into poverty traps with ways to insulate their houses.

Was the television advertisement involving the Minister, clean hard hats and spotless vests a set-up or did it reflect reality? How much funding will be made available and when will it be distributed? The SEI states it will proceed with the scheme when it recruits an adequate complement of contractors but there are any number of contractors available at present.

While I agree this initiative is important and long overdue, the Government has a nerve to be commending itself in this day and age. Given that Fine Gael and Senator O’Toole have long been raising this issue, it is cheeky to claim credit at this late stage. The initiative by no means represents radical thinking.

Senator Paudie Coffey: It is a publicity stunt.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. Unfortunately, I was unable to listen to much of the debate. However, I have read the Minister of State’s speech. I am disappointed by the arguments of Senator McFadden. Essentially she agrees with the initiative.

Senator Paudie Coffey: It is too little, too late.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: That is not a reason to oppose it.

Senator Nicky McFadden: We do not know the budget.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I would be grateful to the Acting Chairman if he could restore order.

Acting Chairman (Senator Joe O’Reilly): The speaker, without interruption.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: The scheme is worthy of our support. Senator McFadden mentioned the problem of fuel poverty. This scheme is designed to deal with that problem. She should be supporting it. It is not sufficient to say it does not go far enough because a good initiative should always be supported.

Senator Nicky McFadden: I do not want to be lectured by the Senator.

Acting Chairman: Senator O’Malley, without interruption.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: As the Minister of State has pointed out, we need to find ways of kick-starting our economy. This green opportunity is one such way. It has the additional benefits of insulating people’s homes, making heating more cost-effective and reducing our carbon emissions. It is a winning scenario and I am astonished at Fine Gael’s response.

[1104]Senator Paudie Coffey: The Senator has not listened to the full debate.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I do not like to criticise for the sake of it and I admit that I have not listened to every speaker but I am responding to the contributions that I heard.

Senator Nicky McFadden: On a point of order, I have been misquoted.

Acting Chairman: Senator O’Malley, without interruption.

Senator Nicky McFadden: I made a legitimate criticism.

Acting Chairman: That is not a point of order.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I have lost my train of thought, which does not help. We do not need to engage in argumentative politics for the sake of it. I spent my afternoon in a meeting of the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security. All members of that committee acknowledged the benefit of working together in the interests of the country. Given these economic times, that is what all of us should do. What happens during this Government’s term in office matters less than the result of our decisions on future generations. This is a positive initiative. However, I would have loved to have seen it being introduced earlier because I am very interested in energy issues.

Senator Nicky McFadden: The Senator is agreeing with me.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: We are overly dependent on imported fossil fuels and are thereby put at risk. As a Member of the previous Dáil, I spent a lot of time trying to convince the then Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to introduce a strong insulation scheme. Such a scheme benefits houses and, more importantly, the people who live in them. It is an extremely welcome initiative and I applaud the Government on it. I hope to qualify for a grant at some point.

We need to think about the amount of energy we consume. It is commendable that we are now addressing the fact that our housing stock has been constructed to low energy efficiency standards. It would have been nice to think that the Opposition would have supported us on this. I do not ask Senators to pat the Government on the back all the time but they should support positive initiatives. Opposition for its own sake does nobody any good.

Senator Nicky McFadden: I do not want to be lectured.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I do not mean to pick on Senator McFadden but I listened with interest to her contribution.

Senator Paddy Burke: She told it the way it is.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: She spoke about logic but the lack of logic in her response to this initiative was regrettable.

Senator Nicky McFadden: The Senator is provoking me.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I will not provoke her further.

Senator Paudie Coffey: Senator O’Malley is covering up for 20 years of mistakes.

Acting Chairman: Senator O’Malley, without interruption.

[1105]Senator Fiona O’Malley: I look forward to seeing the positive effects this initiative will have. We need to take advantage of the opportunities that exist in the area of green energy because that type of thinking will help us through the economic difficulties we face.

Other countries, notably America, are taking similar initiatives to this scheme. Thankfully the new US administration has made a stronger commitment to environmental concerns such as climate change and reducing carbon emissions. These initiatives are similar the world over and are exactly what we need to pursue. I hope they will be extended. I met earlier members of the Construction Industry Federation who told me many people who worked in the construction industry are unemployed. We need to think about these people. There was an array of protests today by people in secure employment who are concerned about their jobs and the contribution they are being asked to make. We need to look a little beyond this and ask ourselves what contribution we want to make to assist those who have lost their jobs. Many in the construction industry have lost their jobs at this point. This initiative offers them hope and opportunity to return to the workforce, which is a commendable effort on the part of Government. I welcome the initiative and wish the Government good luck with it. I hope it is a resounding success.

Senator Pearse Doherty: Ní glacfaidh mé ach seal beag ama chun an méid atá le rá agam ar an gceist seo — an clár fuinnimh agus teasdíonta atá fógraithe ag an Rialtas — a rá. Sa chéad dul síos, caithfidh mé a rá go gcuirim fáilte roimh an rúin atá curtha síos ag páirtithe an Rialtais. Ní féidir liom tacaíocht a thabhairt do mhórchuid an rúin, áfach. Rachfaidh mé isteach sna nithe sin níos moille. Ba mhaith liom níos mó a rá faoi chúrsaí fuinnimh, go mórmhór faoi chostais fhuinnimh. Tááthas orm an deis seo a ghlacadh chun na hábhair sin a phlé.

I support the sentiments expressed in the motion and clearly welcome any move to increase energy efficiency, reduce costs and get people back to work, which this will do. I welcome the introduction of this scheme for which my party has called for a long time. It is a pity it has taken so long to introduce it and that it is not up and running at this stage. However, the introduction of this scheme is a sign of hope. Whenever things are done right and programmes are being developed, however belatedly, one must offer congratulations to those responsible. As stated, there is never a wrong time to do what is right. The insulation programme is the way forward. It is what the country needs at this point. While it will have only limited effect, it must be acknowledged.

I would like to touch on many of the other issues related to energy that need to be addressed. Despite Bord Gáis’s indication today that its gas prices will fall by 25% over the year, fuel poverty will remain a major problem. The Institute of Public Health study in 2007 stated that fuel poverty in this country was at an unacceptably high level by international standards. This was prior to the more recent steep increases in gas and electricity charges. Families on marginal incomes and elderly people in particular are most affected, often to the extent of having to get into further debt to heat their homes.

It was estimated that in the region of 2,800 people per annum on the island of Ireland die as a result of deficiencies in households in terms of their being able to meet their energy needs, which is shameful. The most alarming aspect of the studies on fuel poverty is that the rates of fuel poverty increased even during the years of highest economic growth and that the level of household income below which families were finding it difficult to meet their energy needs was rising steeply, an indication that energy prices and the relative proportion of household income required to meet their needs was rising at a faster rate than most other essentials.

I have reservations about Bord Gáis committing itself to lowering electricity prices by 10% in competition with the ESB. Surely, given we are dealing with two State agencies, it would make more sense that the energy regulator allow the ESB to lower its prices to consumers to similarly reflect the global price trends expected to be reflected in falling gas charges. There is [1106]also concern that in seeking to expand its share of the electricity market, Bord Gáis is boasting its attractiveness to potential private investors in the event of it being privatised, something I do not believe would be in the interests of this country or Irish consumers. Donegal, which is the region I represent and most of the west of Ireland does not have access to the gas network. It is hoped that the Government will introduce initiatives, such as those outlined in my report, Awakening the West, to subsidise these regions so that gas can be provided to them.

While the national insulation programme will address some of the problems associated with energy conservation and costs and will provide jobs, it must be said this Government is failing to tackle fuel poverty and to make the necessary investment in renewable energy to ensure its targets are met. Senator O’Malley asked why the Opposition will not support the motion. I support the scheme and the sentiments expressed in the motion. However, to support it would be like congratulating an arsonist who, having set a building alight, threw a bucket of water over it as it burned to the ground.

Why in the first instance must we introduce an insulation scheme? We must do so because successive Governments have allowed the developers in this country to build houses on the cheap, without insulation and using breeze blocks. It is not that long ago since this happened. I am a civil engineer and have worked on sites in Dublin. Houses have been built with breeze blocks that cannot be insulated. This happened because regulations were not tight enough.

The Government’s cosy relationship with the developers allowed them to build houses on the cheap, sell them for massive prices and leave people with the difficulties now being experienced in terms of mortgages. The State must now provide money to fix the problem which the Government and developers created. I cannot support a motion which congratulates the Government on getting its act together. I welcome that it has got its act together but congratulating it on addressing a problem which it caused in the first instance is a step too far. For this reason, I will be opposing the motion.

Senator Paddy Burke: I welcome the opportunity to speak briefly on this motion. While I welcome that the Government has decided finally to do something about conserving energy, I cannot congratulate it on what it has done so far. The Government is almost two years in office, almost as long as the Government of 1995-1997 led by the former Deputy John Bruton. When one considers what that Government did compared with what this Government has done, one can understand why we on this side of the House cannot support this motion.

I would like to follow on from what Senator Doherty had to say about wall insulation options. The outline of the policy states that to insulate the walls of their home, owners may choose to have insulated a cavity wall, internal or external, depending on the construction of their home, and that home owners should seek professional advice about which option is best. Incidentally, we are speaking in this regard of less well-off people. A home owner must have a building energy rating, BER, assessment done of his or her home. This assessment costs in the region of €500 and applicants are entitled to a grant of €200 towards the assessment. Less well-off people are being asked to find €300 towards the cost of a BER assessment of their home. In many cases these people are not in a position to do this.

Some time ago a motion was tabled by this side of the House calling on the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats Government to ban the building with cavity blocks of houses in Dublin, of which there are thousands. The resources provided under this scheme are but a drop in the ocean in comparison with what will be required to insulate the thousands of houses in the city built with such blocks. What is the choice for those with houses built with cavity blocks? They must have either internal or external installation. The report demonstrates that external insulation is by far the most expensive whereas internal installation is a little cheaper. Cavity walls are common in most rural areas, although the planning authority in my county would not [1107]allow one to build a house with cavity blocks and would make sure 4 in. solid block with insulation was used.

It is incredible that the Government fought against the motion to stop the building of houses with cavity blocks. It will be almost impossible to insulate those houses in Dublin because the insulation will have to be undertaken internally or externally, the two most expensive options. This is what has happened with thousands of houses which have been built in the past ten years. The scheme will cost a fortune. The list of those who will carry out the assessments shows only one agency in Dublin although thousands of houses must be assessed and insulated. This scheme is very poorly thought out.

Where is the cut-off point for the low paid? Is it at the minimum wage, €30,000, €40,000 or €50,000? Is it with regard to the condition of the house and whether it is poorly insulated or with regard to the age of the house and whether it was built five, ten or 20 years ago? This is not spelled out very well. The rural organisations that are carrying out these assessments contain good people who voluntarily give up much time. It is they, at the end of the day, who will decide what funding is dished out to successful applicants. Where will the line be drawn? Is it in regard to the age of the house or the income of the families?

Will local authority houses qualify for the scheme? Given the new schemes announced by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in recent years, particularly in terms of the existing stock of houses, the council housing stock is worst off at this time. There are very few, if any, schemes being put in place by the Government to upgrade the existing local authority housing stock. The Minister of State with responsibility for housing recently put €20 million in place to rent new houses that have been built by developers in recent years but this will be to the detriment of the local authority housing stock.

The Minister of State might explain what other schemes could be put in place such as in regard to wind energy and domestic turbines. Many houses or groups of houses would install domestic turbines if grant assistance were available towards this. The Government could go down this road. The new oil in this country is wind and wave energy but the Government is moving too slowly in this regard. We must seek out the opportunities that exist at present. There is no point talking about them but until now it has been all talk and no action. The people are waiting for action and require that it be taken.

Many people are involved in energy conservation throughout the country and while they may not be qualified to carry out building energy rating, BER, assessments, in most cases they know exactly what must be done. Those contractors should be allowed to carry out the work. These assessments will eat up a considerable amount of money. In some cases, an assessment will cost up to €500 and the less well-off will find it difficult to get this money in place to avail of the grant, whether it is for attic insulation or the many other insulation ideas the Government has put forward.

Like my colleagues, I see this as a step forward but I do not believe any great congratulations are due to the Government. There is very little action and what action has been taken is too little, too late. I congratulate the Surface Power company from Tourmakeady, County Mayo. The chief executive of the company is John Quinn who is very innovative and has done tremendous work in this area in recent years. We should have more companies of this type and such people should get every assistance and grant available to help them put forward more ideas in regard to energy conservation.

Senator Larry Butler: I thank the Minister of State for attending. It is important that we become the cutting edge of green industry and we have a great opportunity in this regard. I would not agree with some of the comments from the Opposition, particularly those of Senator O’Toole. Many other countries, including the UK, Canada and the United States, have now taken on the new installation programmes. Canada in particular has been to the forefront in [1108]regard to retrofit and energy conservation. It is in this area that Ireland can become the new leading edge with regard to this technology.

I did not get a chance in my earlier contribution to finish what I intended to say about renewables. While installation is the first and an important part of the job we must carry out, it is not the only one. Senator Burke suggested it is necessary to have a BER certificate to carry out this work but it is not. It is necessary to have a BER certificate if one is selling a house.

Senator Paudie Coffey: A certificate is required before one gets the grant.

Senator Larry Butler: One is supposed to get the work carried out and then get the BER on the house to see how it rates. However, if one is selling the house, one has to have a BER certificate.

Quite a few private companies have set up in business to carry out the BER. There will not be a problem finding an inspector because quite a few companies in Dublin are now well set up in this regard and also with regard to retrofit. Retrofit is nothing new. Most of the small builders who have been carrying out work over the years are well qualified to do this.

There was also a misconception among some speakers with regard to cavity block, which can of course be insulated both outside and inside. I would not be big supporter of cavity block construction and would prefer to see a double-skin wall being built, which is the way most of the houses in the country have been built. However, for a fast and efficient way of carrying out work, cavity block was certainly a big help. It was one of the first improvements in system-built houses and it was possible to build them very quickly. However, they were not energy efficient. Fingal County Council and Dún Laoghaire County Council were the first local authorities in the country to demand a 40% increase in the energy rating of houses in Dublin. That move was supported by Fianna Fáil, the Green Party, Fine Gael and all other parties in both councils.

I refer to the transfer to smart metering and alternative energy. This is a very significant move amounting to a total investment of €18 billion in our homes. The costing suggests a saving from insulation amounting to €9 billion. Let us consider the options in alternative energy, including micro wind power generators and solar power. Carey Glass Solar has perfected a panel that will supply electricity to houses, a significant advance in solar power. The development of micro wind power is very important because it may allow a small generator to be placed on one’s house. It may be possible to use these in group schemes and there are various other options. There is a great opportunity to go down this road.

The emergence of pellet boilers is a significant advance and a very efficient way to provide heat. When renovating my daughter’s house we installed a pellet boiler which is a fantastic, cheap, efficient and clean way to heat the house. It produces one cup of dust every week, a small pot of ash that can be put on one’s flowers.

I commend the motion to the House. It is linked with the smart economy. In future we must operate in a better and smarter way and ensure greater value for money. That is how we will get ourselves out of the trouble we are in at present. Such initiatives as the insulation scheme amount to the way forward. We must invest more money in this area. This proposal will create 4,000 jobs. We should bear in mind some of the figures. Every €25 million invested will create €100 million and a €52 million return to the Exchequer. Where else is such value to be found? Removing people from the dole queue saves approximately €25,000 per person. That is the value we can extract from this scheme.

Double glazed windows should be included in the scheme and it was a mistake to omit them from it. Some 25% of domestic heat is lost through windows. Without a double glazing unit one can lose 25% of heat and one may not reach the efficiency rating required by the building [1109]energy rating, BER, inspector. It is important that this is amended. While this investment is very welcome, we need more. The scheme will cover approximately 15,000 houses, which is not enough because there are 1 million houses in the country. This is a great opportunity to pump prime the economy and there is no better way to do this for the Exchequer and the householder. If we take money from the householder we must return some of it and this is a great way to do so.

7 o’clock

Let us consider the options for alternative energy. Thermal energy efficiency is another option and we must examine the design of electrical fixtures in the household. There are significant amounts of money and energy to be saved in this area. It is possible to save €350 per year on light bulbs alone, a very significant amount of money. It is simply a matter of changing the bulb and it will last longer and provide more light. In the future, technology will bring substantial savings in that regard. I commend the motion and I hope the Minister will expedite the scheme. There is no reason not to do so. The sooner the Minister gets the scheme under way the better. There are many contractors available to do the work. The average contractor can do it and it does not involve any science. We should get along and create the equivalent of three Dells or 15,000 jobs in this industry. We should get on with the work.

Amendment put.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 17; Níl, 26.

Tá
Bacik, Ivana.	Bradford, Paul.
Burke, Paddy.	Buttimer, Jerry.
Coffey, Paudie.	Coghlan, Paul.
Cummins, Maurice.	Doherty, Pearse.
Donohoe, Paschal.	Fitzgerald, Frances.
Hannigan, Dominic.	Healy Eames, Fidelma.
McFadden, Nicky.	Norris, David.
O’Reilly, Joe.	O’Toole, Joe.
White, Alex.

Níl
Boyle, Dan.	Brady, Martin.
Butler, Larry.	Callanan, Peter.
Carty, John.	Cassidy, Donie.
Corrigan, Maria.	Daly, Mark.
de Búrca, Déirdre.	Ellis, John.
Feeney, Geraldine.	Glynn, Camillus.
Hanafin, John.	Leyden, Terry.
MacSharry, Marc.	McDonald, Lisa.
Ó Domhnaill, Brian.	Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
O’Brien, Francis.	O’Malley, Fiona.
O’Sullivan, Ned.	Ormonde, Ann.
Phelan, Kieran.	Ross, Shane.
White, Mary M.	Wilson, Diarmuid.