vol. 599 thursday, no. 1 3 march 2005 · 3/3/2005 · 3 order of 3 march 2005. business 4 mr....

Vol. 599 Thursday,No. 1 3 March 2005

DIOSPOIREACHTAI PARLAIMINTEPARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

DAIL EIREANN

TUAIRISC OIFIGIUIL—Neamhcheartaithe

(OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)

Thursday, 3 March 2005.

Visit of Canadian Delegation … … … … … … … … … … … 1Requests to move Adjournment of Dail under Standing Order 31 … … … … … … 1Order of Business … … … … … … … … … … … … 3Health (Amendment) Bill 2005: Second Stage (resumed) … … … … … … … 14Driver Testing and Standards Authority Bill 2004: Second Stage (resumed) … … … … 49Ceisteanna — Questions

Minister for FinancePriority Questions … … … … … … … … … … … 79Other Questions … … … … … … … … … … … 92

Adjournment Debate Matters … … … … … … … … … … … 104Adjournment Debate

Fisheries Protection … … … … … … … … … … … 104Industrial Development … … … … … … … … … … … 107Relocation of Institute … … … … … … … … … … … 114

Questions: Written Answers … … … … … … … … … … … 117

1 2

DAIL EIREANN

DIOSPOIREACHTAI PARLAIMINTEPARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

TUAIRISC OIFIGIUILOFFICIAL REPORT

Imleabhar 599 Volume 599

Deardaoin, 3 Marta 2005.Thursday, 3 March 2005.

————

Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar10.30 a.m.

————

Paidir.Prayer.

————

Visit of Canadian Delegation.

An Ceann Comhairle: Before proceeding withthe Order of Business, I wish on my own behalfand on behalf of the Members of Dail Eireann tooffer a cead mıle failte, a most sincere welcome,to a delegation of members from the CanadianParliament who join us in the Distinguished Visit-ors Gallery.

I express the hope that you will find your visitenjoyable, successful and that it will be to ourmutual benefit.

Request to move Adjournment of Dail underStanding Order 31.

An Ceann Comhairle: Before coming to theOrder of Business I propose to deal with anumber of notices under Standing Order 31. I willcall Deputies in the order in which they submittedtheir notices to my office.

Mr. Connolly: I propose the adjournment ofDail Eireann under Standing Order 31 to discussthe following matter of urgent public and nationalconcern, namely, the necessity for a multi-phasecontingency plan for the management of an influ-enza pandemic said by the World Health Organ-

isation to be inevitable, the need to prepare tomitigate the direct medical and economic effectsof such a pandemic by ensuring that adequatemeasures are taken before a pandemic occurs sothat essential services are maintained, and theprovision of a surveillance network for humanand animal influenza in view of the danger oftheir joint mutation with appalling consequencesfor the world’s population.

Mr. Healy: I seek the adjournment of the Dailunder Standing Order 31 to raise a matter ofurgent importance, namely, the immediatenecessity for the Tanaiste and Minister for Healthand Children to approve funding for the openingof completed medical units at Our Lady’sHospital, Cashel, to approve the 20-bed GPassessment unit at the hospital, in addition to giv-ing approval to fund the completion and openingof the 23-bed acute medical unit at SouthTipperary General Hospital, Clonmel, in order toprovide a quality health service for the people ofsouth Tipperary and to implement the terms ofthe High Court settlement for the developmentof hospital services in south Tipperary, and toallow the Minister to make a statement on thematter.

3 Order of 3 March 2005. Business 4

Mr. Gogarty: I seek the adjournment of theHouse under Standing Order 31 to debate anissue of national importance, namely, the needfor the Government to tackle the issue of classsize in primary schools as a matter of priority,given that our class sizes are among the largest inthe European Union and that internationalresearch points to smaller class sizes having anoticeable improvement on a child’s educationaldevelopment.

Mr. J. Higgins: I seek the adjournment of theDail under Standing Order 31 to discuss a matterof crucial importance in the context of thehospital construction programme, namely, theurgent need to fund the building of a new hospitalin Daingean Uı Chuis in Dingle, County Kerry,while an offer of land at no cost to the Stateremains on the table.

Mr. Deenihan: I seek the adjournment of theDail under Standing Order 31 to discuss the fol-lowing matter of national importance, namely,the apparent lack of progress in re-opening theNational Aquatic Centre following storm damageto the roof on 1 January and the considerableinconvenience this is causing its 4,000 member-ship and other users of the centre, including manyof our elite swimmers.

Mr. Gormley: I seek the adjournment of theDail under Standing Order 31 to discuss an issueof urgent public importance, namely, the decisionby the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, to allowa mobile phone base station to be installed onArdee House in Rathmines beside St. Mary’sCollege and junior school and close to St. Louis’school, given that the Stewart report in Britainhas stated categorically that such an installationshould not be placed near to schools, and theneed for the Minister, Deputy McDowell, whosearea this is, to ensure that his Progressive Demo-crats colleague, Deputy Parlon, would reconsiderthis irresponsible decision which poses a threat tochildren in the Dublin South-East constituency.

A Deputy: Hear, hear.

An Ceann Comhairle: Having considered thematters raised, they are not in order under Stand-ing Order 31.

Order of Business.

The Tanaiste: It is proposed to take No. 3,Health (Amendment) Bill 2005 — Second Stage(resumed); No. 17, Driver Testing and StandardsAuthority Bill 2004 — Second Stage (resumed);and No. 18, Land Bill 2004 [Seanad] — SecondStage (resumed).

It is proposed notwithstanding anything inStanding Orders that the proceedings on theresumed Second Stage of No. 3 shall, if not pre-viously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at1.30 p.m.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is the proposal for deal-ing with No. 3, Health (Amendment) Bill 2005,agreed to?

Mr. Kenny: No Sir, it is not. It is refreshing tobe opposed by the three Marys. This is unique inthe annals of this Parliament.

Mary Coughlan: This is what I call a frontbench.

Mr. Deasy: The holy trinity.

Mr. Kenny: I have already made the case onnumerous occasions of being opposed to guillo-tines of Bills on Second Stage and I do so now.This is an important Bill and it deserves moretime. I therefore oppose it on that basis.

Mr. Rabbitte: I agree with that. I have a furtherreason for opposing the guillotine in addition towhat Deputy Kenny stated. The Tanaiste wasunable to come to the House yesterday to con-tribute to the Bill and given the remarks shemade about systemic maladministration in herDepartment, irrespective of the Travers report,she ought to be enabled to inform the House asto why she made such an unprecedented remark.I am not taking sides on it. The Tanaiste may bevery well informed as to the necessity for makingsuch remarks but she ought to be provided withthe opportunity to address the House on theissues concerned.

Mr. Gormley: I am opposed to the guillotiningof this Bill. We have witnessed a debacle whenlegislation was guillotined. The Tanaiste shouldhave learned the lesson of rushing legislationthrough this House but she obviously has not. Sheappears to be behaving like a headless chicken inrespect of health services in the State. There hasbeen an accident and emergency crisis, MRSA isrampant and now the Tanaiste’s colleague is pro-posing a mobile telephone mast for my constitu-ency, which will pose a threat to the children inDublin South-East.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy, we are goingway off the motion before the House.

Mr. Gormley: I ask the Tanaiste to reconsiderthis irresponsible decision. It is disgraceful thatthe Government is proceeding in this manner. Itis arrogant and totally undemocratic.

Caoimhghın O Caolain: The guillotining of thisBill will significantly curtail the opportunity ofMembers to participate in important legislationin respect of the two key focuses, namely, the GP-only medical card proposal and the reintroduc-tion of fees for nursing home patients. On SecondStage last night, I questioned the marriage ofthese two separate matters in the one Bill andthat the measure is being rushed when we stillhave not seen the Government’s proposals for thereimbursement of the illegal charges which were


applied to long-stay residents in nursing homesover many years. The reimbursement plan mustbe expedited.

While Deputy Rabbitte has highlighted theTanaiste’s absence from the House, none of herMinisters of State attended for the greater part ofthe debate last evening. The Government pres-ence in the House was a Minister of State at theDepartment of Agriculture and Food. What doesthat say about the Department in respect of thislegislation when neither the Tanaiste and Minsterfor Health and Children nor her Ministers ofState attended the House over the period?

Ms Burton: The Minister of State at theDepartment of Health and Children, Deputy TimO’Malley, was here.

Mr. T. O’Malley: Yes, I was in the House.

Caoimhghın O Caolain: It is absolutely out-rageous. I strongly oppose the imposition of aguillotine on this legislation. It is wholly andabsolutely inappropriate.

Mr. Rabbitte: There might be a vacancy in theDepartment. The Minister of State, Deputy BattO’Keeffe, might yet get a promotion.

The Tanaiste: I was absent from the House yes-terday because I was on official business in Corkwhich had been planned for a considerable time.

Mr. Allen: There was a nice shot of theTanaiste on television.

Ms McManus: In which case why was the Billtaken yesterday?

The Tanaiste: The Opposition was keen tohave an entire day yesterday for the debate. I hadoriginally hoped to move the Bill on Tuesdayevening but Members felt they wanted more time.In any event, Second Stage was moved by theMinister of State at the Department of Healthand Children, Deputy Sean Power, who hasresponsibility in this area and he was here for a

The Dail divided: Ta, 63; Nıl 47.

Ta

Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Sean.Blaney, Niall.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Seamus.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cregan, John.Curran, John.de Valera, Sıle.Dempsey, Tony.

considerable part of yesterday morning. It is nottraditional that the line Department necessarilysits through the entire Second Stage proceedingsof a Bill.

The aspects of the Bill which relate to chargingfor shelter and maintenance for long-term carewere the subject of considerable debate in thisHouse and had been cleared by the SupremeCourt, as Deputies know. We are losing \2.5 mill-ion for every week that we cannot collect thisparticular charge. Deputies opposite werescreaming at me for weeks about the GP-onlymedical cards. We want to issue them in April,which is why it is important we proceed with thelegislation.

Caoimhghın O Caolain: Where are the plans toreimburse people?

Mr. Connaughton: Why are the two issueslinked in the Bill?

The Tanaiste: I will speak on the Bill in theHouse this morning. I stand over the comments Imade because I stated in the House two weeksago that I had understood, as had the Taoiseach,that these charges——

Mr. Allen: It was maladministration byMinisters.

The Tanaiste: Maladministration does not justaffect public officials. When we stated that thesecharges were levied, we thought it was on thebasis of good faith and that no one knew thatwhat we were doing was wrong. That was not thecase. It became very clear over recent weeks thatit had been known for a considerable time thatwe were acting illegally. That is why I stated whatI did. The Travers report will deal with this issue.I hope to have it to hand tomorrow, bring itbefore the Cabinet on Tuesday and publish it thatday. I assure the House that there is no questionof my sitting on it because of the by-elections.

Question put: “That the proposal for dealingwith No. 3 be agreed.”

Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Sean.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Sean.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Hoctor, Maire.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Kirk, Seamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.


Ta—continued

McDowell, Michael.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheal.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M. J.O Cuıv, Eamon.O’Connor, Charlie.O’Donnell, Liz.O’Donoghue, John.O’Donovan, Denis.O’Flynn, Noel.O’Keeffe, Batt.

Nıl

Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Breen, James.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Bruton, Richard.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Connolly, Paudge.Coveney, Simon.Crowe, Sean.Deasy, John.Deenihan, Jimmy.Enright, Olwyn.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Harkin, Marian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Joe.Howlin, Brendan.Kehoe, Paul.Kenny, Enda.Lynch, Kathleen.McCormack, Padraic.

Tellers: Ta, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher; Nıl, Deputies Kehoe and Broughan.

Question declared carried.

Mr. Kenny: The Tanaiste made an announce-ment that the Health and Safety Authority willexamine accident and emergency units inhospitals throughout the country. In view of theconcern that has legitimately been expressedabout a number of these units, would it not bemore appropriate that the Health and SafetyAuthority call to these units at a normal workingtime rather than conduct a pre-arranged visit?

An Ceann Comhairle: That does not arise onthe Order of Business.

Mr. Kenny: It does under the health Bill.

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputies can only askabout the legislation. They cannot discuss thecontent of the health Bill at this stage.

Mr. Kenny: The Health and Safety Authoritywould get a clear view and understanding of whathappens in accident and emergency units.

O’Malley, Fiona.O’Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Power, Sean.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Joe.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Finian.McGrath, Paul.McHugh, Paddy.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Neville, Dan.O Caolain, Caoimhghın.O Snodaigh, Aengus.O’Keeffe, Jim.O’Shea, Brian.O’Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Perry, John.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Sean.Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Roisın.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.

An Ceann Comhairle: It does not arise now.The Deputy will have an opportunity to discuss itwhen the Bill is before the House.

Mr. Kenny: The Ceann Comhairle has beentrying to knock me for the past three or four days.

Mr. Allen: It is just another gimmick.

11 o’clock

Mr. Howlin: The Tanaiste is well positioned torealise the importance of my question. Will theMinister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment

make a statement to the House todayon the decision of the Governmentto withdraw its support package to

Intel on foot of resistance to it by the EuropeanCommission? Will he explain the background tothe decision and answer questions on the matter?

An Ceann Comhairle: Are statementspromised?

The Tanaiste: We have not factored in state-ments on the Order of Business agreed earlier.However, perhaps there will be Private NoticeQuestions or an Adjournment debate. I am sure


the Minister would be more than happy to dealwith the matter in the House.

Mr. Howlin: I have tabled a Private NoticeQuestion. On foot of the Tanaiste’s response, willit be favourably considered?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Chair will considerit and communicate with the Deputy.

Mr. Gormley: With regard to the electroniccommunications (miscellaneous provisions) Bill,will the State take responsibility for the healtheffects of mobile telephone masts, one of whichis situated in my constituency of Dublin South-East?

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot discuss thecontent of legislation on the Order of Business.

Mr. Gormley: Will the Tanaiste take action onthe health effects of mobile telephone masts?

The Tanaiste: I understand that even theDeputy has a mobile telephone. We will have thelegislation this year. Does the Deputy have amobile telephone?

Mr. Gormley: The Tanaiste is very observant.Why can she not do something about the mastin Rathmines which is beside children? She hasdone nothing.

Ms O. Mitchell: Today’s newspapers reportedthat Mr. John Lynch has been reappointed aschairman of CIE for a further three years. Doesthis indicate the legislation for the break-up ofCIE is being abandoned? Does it mean theGovernment is abandoning bus competition,which was predicated on the break-up of CIE bythree successive Ministers?

The Tanaiste: The Government’s reform prog-ramme for transport has not been abandoned.We do not need specific legislation to reappointMr. Lynch to the board of CIE.

Ms O. Mitchell: I asked on the break-up of CIEon which legislation has been promised for closeon seven years.

The Tanaiste: The legislation will comeforward.

Mr. Gormley: Ask Ivor.

The Tanaiste: He is not around this morning. Ido not see him in the Chamber.

Ms O. Mitchell: The Tanaiste is stuck for ananswer when he is not here.

The Tanaiste: We will have the legislation thisyear.

Mr. Sherlock: As there appears to be a differ-ence of opinion between the Minister for ForeignAffairs and the Minister for Defence in thematter of troops serving overseas, when will thedefence (amendment)Bill, which will deal withcertain aspects of the Act, be dealt with?

The Tanaiste: It is not possible to give a precisedate but the heads of the Bill are due this year.

Mr. Boyle: Without wishing to pre-empt anydecision the Ceann Comhairle might make lateron a Private Notice Question, will time be madeavailable in the House in the near future for adebate on the recommendations of the enterprisestrategy group which is meant to deal with thearea of research and development, and the ques-tion of supporting indigenous industry andbecoming less reliant--——

An Ceann Comhairle: Is a debate promised?

The Tanaiste: No.

An Ceann Comhairle: If a debate has not beenpromised, it is a matter for the Whips.

Mr. Boyle: It has been referred to in the Houseand has been requested. Has the request beenacceded to.

An Ceann Comhairle: A request is not suf-ficient. It must be promised in the House andappropriate to the Order of Business or everyDeputy would be in a position to ask about anyissue. We would be here all day and would notget through the Health (Amendment) Bill.

Mr. Boyle: It was requested at a Whips meet-ing. I ask for an opinion.

Mr. Stanton: Last night, a Government rep-resentative stated that 30% of the Disability Billshould be rewritten. Does this mean it is beingwithdrawn and we will have a new disability Bill?Has the Government made a decision on this?

The Tanaiste: No, the Disability Bill is pro-ceeding. It has not been withdrawn.

Mr. Stanton: A representative spoke on behalfof the Government last night.

The Tanaiste: Who was that?

Mr. Stanton: It was said that 30% would bewithdrawn.

A Deputy: Was it Vincent Browne?

Mr. Broughan: Does the Government intend toredraft the Postal (Miscellaneous Provisions)Bill2001 in the context of current discussions at theLabour Court? Will it be taken off the OrderPaper? In the marine sector, is it intended to


[Mr. Broughan.]remove the Law of the Sea (Repression of Piracy)Bill 2001 from the Order Paper?

The Tanaiste: The first Bill will be taken thissession. Did the Deputy ask on marine services?

Mr. Broughan: There was an indication fromthe Chief Whip that the Postal (MiscellaneousProvisions) Bill 2001 would be taken off theOrder Paper.

The Tanaiste: The Chief Whip disagrees. Hetells me that Order for Second Stage is proceed-ing. My note tells me the Law of the Sea(Repression of Piracy) Bill 2001 was published in2001 and is awaiting Second Stage.

Mr. Cowen: The Deputy should run up theJolly Roger.

Mr. Ring: When will the Freedom of Infor-mation Act be extended to include vocationaleducation committees? Is it only in place to pro-tect officials? This relates to the Local Govern-ment (No. 2) Act 2003 whereby new managersand assistant managers were appointed. When Itabled a recent question to find out what bonusesthey received, I was told I could not get thatinformation. Does the legislation only coverinformation on Oireachtas Members’ expenses?

A serious question arises in regard to theUdaras na Gaeltachta Bill. What is the Govern-ment’s view on the dual mandate? Councillorsare members of Udaras while serving on localcouncils.

An Ceann Comhairle: It does not arise on theOrder of Business.

Mr. Ring: Of course it arises on the Order ofBusiness. It refers to promised legislation. I wantto know the Government view. Councillors canserve on Udaras and Deputies can serve inEurope but I cannot serve on a council and in theDail at the same time. Is this not hypocrisy atits worst?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is out oforder.

Mr. Cowen: Ta siad da-theangach.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Tanaiste shouldanswer on the Freedom of Information Act.

The Tanaiste: The extension of freedom ofinformation provisions to other bodies is a matterfor the Minister for Finance. I will consult withthe Minister and come back to the Deputy. Heneeds to time to reflect and consider theDeputy’s point.

Mr. Ring: We need the Minister for Finance.

Mr. Cowen: I could tell Members about theirexpenses.

The Tanaiste: The heads of the Udaras naGaeltachta Bill will be produced this year.

Mr. J. Higgins: In view of the court decisionyesterday on a case in which a couple wereseriously injured, through no fault of their own,but Bus Eireann was also judged not to beresponsible, which leaves a very unfair situation,will amending legislation be considered to ensurejust compensation for those in circumstances suchas this?

The Tanaiste: No legislation is required. Wehave a fair and impartial courts system and I willnot interfere with a court decision.

Mr. Gormley: You put Deputy Joe Higgins injail for that.

Mr. J. Higgins: I am not asking the Tanaiste tointerfere with the court. However, the judgestated it was up to the Oireachtas to introduceamending legislation to cover a situation wherepeople injured through no fault of their ownwould get just compensation.

An Ceann Comhairle: I suggest the Deputysubmit a question to the appropriate lineMinister.

The Tanaiste: I am sure the line Minister willstudy the judgment.

Mr. J. Higgins: Who is the line Minister?

The Tanaiste: The Minister for Transport.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should sub-mit a question to the Minister.

Mr. J. Higgins: He might still be stuck on theBlanchardstown bypass for all I know.

A Deputy: Or in an ivory tower.

Ms Burton: Or on a trolley, he is so sick.

Mr. Coveney: The European Commissionrecently introduced an air transport directivewhich provides for compensation for passengersif their flights are delayed or cancelled, amongother matters. It also requires individual Govern-ments to introduce complaints procedures forpassengers and to set up a board to do this. Doesthe Government intend to do this? Will it requirelegislation? If so, when will we see it?

The Tanaiste: That will probably be a matterfor the Director of Consumer Affairs or the Mini-ster for Transport. However, I am sure the matterwill be considered.

13 Health (Amendment) Bill 2005: 3 March 2005. Second Stage (Resumed) 14

Mr. Coveney: The directive has already beenintroduced.

The Tanaiste: Is the Deputy a frequenttraveller?

Mr. Coveney: I am.

An Ceann Comhairle: A question on Europeanlegislation can be answered later. It does not haveto be answered on the day under StandingOrder 26.

Mr. Rabbitte: This morning newspapers andradio reported on the harrowing circumstances ofone family with four autistic children, which high-lights the appallingly bad services in place, partic-ularly for autistic children, throughout the coun-try. As Minister for Health and Children, is thereanything the Tanaiste can do to intervene toalleviate the burden on this particular——

An Ceann Comhairle: That does not arise onthe Order of Business. I suggest the Deputy usesanother way of raising the matter in the House. Icall Deputy McManus.

Mr. Rabbitte: To be in order, when theTanaiste introduces the Supplementary Estimatealready promised, will she include an allocationspecifically-——

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot discuss thecontent of the Supplementary Estimate. I suggestthe Deputy uses the proper structures of theHouse to submit a question.

Mr. Rabbitte: I will not discuss the content ofit. Can the Tanaiste make some provision toenable the former health boards to provideservices?

An Ceann Comhairle: That does not arise onthe Order of Business. I call Deputy McManus.

Mr. Rabbitte: A Cheann Comhairle, you arebeing unreasonable. The Tanaiste-——

An Ceann Comhairle: That is the Deputy’spoint of view. The Standing Order is quite spec-ific. I do not want to take up the time of theHouse reading it again. However, the Deputyknows the rules of the House and the StandingOrders. The Deputy knows there are ampleopportunities for him, today if he wishes, to raisethe matter in another way in this House.

Mr. Rabbitte: This is a harrowing human situa-tion and with the Minister for Health and Chil-dren in the House we have an opportunity——

An Ceann Comhairle: I appreciate that but theChair has ruled out other Deputies on similarquestions in accordance with Standing Orders.The Chair is obliged to obey Standing Orders justlike everyone else.

Ms McManus: The Tanaiste has promised acompensation scheme to pay back to the elderlypeople money illegally taken from them by theState. Will the Tanaiste say when details of thatscheme will be published? When will the Sup-plementary Estimate come before the House, sothat people can get their money back?

The Tanaiste: I have indicated that a Cabinetsub-committee is looking at this matter and wecertainly cannot proceed with the scheme untilwe have the outcome of the Travers report. Assoon as we can after that we will make clear theGovernment’s intentions in this respect. We wantto do things as quickly as possible, but this is amammoth task involving more than 200,000people — perhaps as many as 300,000 — so thelogistical issues as to how this might be handledmust also be examined. We have indicated thatwe want a scheme which will be as simple as poss-ible for those affected to access what they areentitled to, and the Government is approachingthe matter with that in mind.

Health (Amendment) Bill 2005: Second Stage(Resumed).

Question again proposed: “That the Bill benow read a Second Time.”

Cecilia Keaveney: I acknowledge the import-ance of the doctor-only medical card but in thecontext of the broader modernisation agendawhich the Minister spoke of yesterday we mightconsider the concept of, for example, ten freedoctor visits and ten free prescriptions, or five ofeach, for those at different levels of income sothat there is a broader modernisation agendathan just having the medical card or havingnothing.

I am glad the Tanaiste is here this morning asI wish to raise the issue of the medical card beingused for prevention rather than just for treat-ment. It is important that screening programmes,for example, cervical smear tests, andBreastCheck are extended to the north west andnationally. The point made by the Irish CancerSociety that the medical card is not available forprevention and for screening needs to beaddressed.

While the Tanaiste is here, I again ask her toconsider the need for beds in Letterkenny Gen-eral Hospital. The situation there should not beone of “bed-blocking”. There has been a substan-tial population increase of 42% in the area,accompanied by a demography of aging people,so that these beds are a necessity and in no sensea luxury for the people of the north west. Sincethe Executive is unlikely to be up and runningand the North-South Ministerial Council will notmeet in the near future, I ask the Tanaiste whatwe can do in the meantime to ensure that North-South co-operation will continue between Letter-kenny and Derry. Without the North-South Min-isterial Council and the Executive, many of the


[Cecilia Keaveney.]health issues which can be dealt with at a cross-Border level are not being given sufficientpriority.

There is a critical mass between Derry andDonegal which means that services missing inDerry can be provided in Donegal and vice versa.For example, there is a very good breast screen-ing programme up and running in Derry and cer-vical smears undertaken on people in Donegalare being examined in Derry. Is there anythingthe Tanaiste can do to ensure that, in the absenceof the Executive and the North-South MinisterialCouncil, the health issues in the north west whichare dealt with in Northern Ireland will beaddressed. There is a very good track record ofAltnagelvin hospital and Letterkenny GeneralHospital working together. We needBreastCheck and all the other services, as well asbeds for Letterkenny General Hospital. I wel-come the concept of the doctor-only medicalcards.

Mr. Neville: I am glad of the opportunity todiscuss the Bill. I welcome the Tanaiste to theHouse and I look forward to her contribution.

The Bill deals with the Supreme Court decisionon charges made to the elderly and doctor-onlymedical cards. Had it not been for the work ofthe Fine Gael leader, Deputy Kenny, and DeputyPerry, the issue of the illegality of charging eld-erly people in nursing homes would never havebeen raised. The Government has argued that theillegality goes back to 1976. The Supreme Courtdecision suggests that the illegality became muchclearer after the passage of the 2001 Act, whichwas brought in as part of the Government’s pre-election spree and the implications of which werenot fully thought out. The Comptroller and Audi-tor General’s report of 2001 revealed that thedecision on the over-70s medical card was takenby the Department of Finance in the days beforethe 2001 budget with little or no consultation withthe Department of Health and Children.

There is evidence that following enactment ofthe 2001 Act, the Southern Health Board pro-vided the Department of Health and Childrenwith legal advice it had received on long-staycare. The then Minister, Deputy Martin, referredto this legal document in an interview, claiminghe did not read it, while the Tanaiste referred toit in the Dail.

The issue of the over-70s medical card andcharges in public nursing homes was raised at ahigh level meeting attended in December 2003 bythe then Minister, Deputy Martin, the Minister ofState, Deputy Callely, who at the time hadresponsibility for the elderly, and the Minister ofState, Deputy Tim O’Malley. The minutes of thatmeeting show that long-stay charges for the over-70s were discussed. This is clear evidence that theHealth Act 2001 which introduced the over-70smedical card was considered a problem in termsof long-stay charges. The then Minister, DeputyMartin, claimed to have left the meeting when the

issue was being discussed, but the two Ministersof State at the Department remained. We areaware of what has been discussed in the Dail onseveral occasions regarding the informationreceived by the Ministers of State, if the Ministerwas not there. That information and the minutesof the meeting, which were only two pages long,were put on the record of the House by theTanaiste.

People on non-contributory pensions willreceive repayment and their means will beassessed against those pensions. In other words,old age non-contributory pensioners in publicnursing homes will be penalised because HealthService Executive will refund the moneys perhapsto their bank accounts and if the income of pen-sioners goes over the threshold of \20,000 as aresult, their pensions will be reduced. TheDepartment of Social and Family Affairs willclaw back the moneys which the State hasrefunded to those pensioners.

In a response to Deputy Stanton, the Depart-ment pointed out that it has collected \5.4 millionfrom pensioners’ wills in 2004 and the sameamount in 2003. That is an aside, but the point isthat pensioners with no other income or assetsabove the means threshold who choose to savetheir pensions and the moneys they will nowreceive will be penalised when they go above thethreshold. The Department of Social and FamilyAffairs will interpret the refund as means, treat-ing it similar to assets from property and inherit-ance when assessing means. Elderly people arelegally obliged to inform the Department ofSocial and Family if their means change so thattheir pensions can be reviewed. They sign up tothis when they apply for non-contributory pen-sions. The upcoming refunds should not beincluded as assets in the assessment of the meansof those in receipt of the non-contributory pen-sion or other payments such as the disabilityallowance. What is the position of people withintellectual disabilities or those in similar categor-ies? Will they be means tested if they receive arefund? I ask the Minister to take that issue onboard

A number of years ago, I dealt with the case ofa medical card holder who needed incontinencewear. The person was admitted to a private nurs-ing home and the refund for incontinence wearwas withdrawn. The issue was taken up with thehealth board at the time, which refused to makea refund or to recognise that there was an anom-aly. The anomaly was that incontinence padswere not covered where medical card holderswere admitted to private nursing homes.However, prior to admission, they were covered.Following numerous representations to, andpressure on, the Department and the Mid-West-ern Health Board, the position changed in April2003.

Medical card holders charged for incontinencewear in private nursing homes prior to April 2003should be refunded. It is discriminatory to refundmedical card holders availing of public beds. One


of the criteria for not refunding the cost of incon-tinence wear in private nursing homes is entitle-ment to nursing home subvention. If an elderlyperson is in receipt of nursing home subvention,he or she is entitled to a refund. The position iscontradictory and unfair. If this issue was exam-ined as thoroughly as the issue of illegal charging,it would also be found to be illegal. Will the Mini-ster comment on this in her reply?

Earlier the Irish Wheelchair Association madea submission to the Oireachtas Joint Committeeon Health and Children. Its representatives raisedan important issue relating to medical cards forpeople with disabilities. They pointed out thatwheelchair users, in particular, and others withlimited mobility face additional costs associatedwith specialist products such as mobility andcommunications aid and additional expenditureon specialist transport, heating and so on. Despitethe additional costs, their medical card thresholdis the same as that for non-disabled people. Thisleads to people with disabilities not attendingdoctors when ill, resulting in late diagnosis oftheir conditions. Will the new medical cardaddress this issue, given the new guidelinesregarding what can be considered in individualcases other than means?

The association’s representatives also referredto the benefit trap faced by people with dis-abilities. They are dissuaded from taking upemployment but they made a number of recom-mendations. The income limit for medical cardeligibility should be increased significantly forpeople with physical disabilities while, under theback to work initiative, medical card entitlementshould be extended to five years for people withdisabilities. The transfer of entitlement to aidsand appliances to a cost of disability paymentshould not be affected by employment.

I have raised other issues relating to the elderlyon a number of occasions. I refer to the Minister’sexamination of the housing aid for the elderlyscheme and her discussions with the Departmentof the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern-ment. This issue raises its head regularly in ourconstituency clinics. Elderly people wait for yearsfor simple work to be done to their houses toenable them to live in comfort when they haveneeds due to their age. The disabled person’sgrant scheme is operated by local authorises butthat has been brought into disrepute recently,although my experiences with Limerick CountyCouncil have been positive.

However, the same cannot be said of the hous-ing aid for the elderly scheme and its objectives.When the Bill was introduced to abolish thehealth boards, the Minister was emphatic that theissue of representations by public representativeswould be recognised as part of the change fromhealth boards to the Health Service Executive. Imade a representation on behalf of an elderlyperson living alone on 4 March 2003 and I out-lined the reasons he needed work done to hishouse. This need was recognised by the healthboard and the community welfare officer who

examined the case. However, following two yearsof frustration I tabled a parliamentary questionto the Minister to find out when the work wouldbe done. The question was passed on to theHealth Service Executive and I received a reply,which stated, “I wish to confirm that an appli-cation for housing aid is at present with the hous-ing aid department in Limerick and they areawaiting final input into the process from the rel-evant services”. For the past two years the casehas been with the Limerick health services but Iwant to know what action is planned. Having notobtained the information locally, the Ministerdirected the question to the Health ServiceExecutive. I am now told it is with the housing aiddepartment in Limerick, something that I haveknown for two years. Surely the Tanaiste andMinister for Health and Children must acceptthat it flies in the face of her commitment to theHouse, especially on Committee Stage of the pre-vious health Bill regarding the abolition of thehealth boards.

Regarding the elderly and nursing homes, thereis obviously growing pressure because of theneeds of our aging population. There are inad-equate resources in the public sector to deal withthe demand for nursing home services frompeople with limited means. The area needs con-siderable examination to ensure people who areelderly and need inpatient or nursing home careare treated with dignity and respect in examiningtheir situation.

There are a few matters that I wish to raise,the first being the subvention, which has not beenexamined for the best part of four years. It is anobvious statement, but it is worth saying that thecost of nursing homes has increased dramatically,having more than doubled in the past four years.The nursing home subvention element has notincreased to match it, and that is putting enor-mous pressure on families and especially the resi-dents themselves. We now have people in needof nursing homes whose families are consideringsocial housing for them because of the pressures.There must be a review of the nursing home sub-vention payment which, as we were informed thisweek, averages \150 per week. In the context ofnursing homes costing more than \600 per week,that is inadequate.

I also wish to raise the issue of the enhanced,top-up nursing home subvention. The disparitybetween areas in that regard is totallyunacceptable. It is approximately \50 in the mid-west, while in the former Eastern Health Boardarea it is \650. How can one justify such a dispar-ity in the enhanced nursing home subvention pay-ment? It is paid after all aspects of a person’s cir-cumstances have been examined and it becomesquite obvious that there is a serious financial issueinvolved which determines that an enhancednursing home subvention should be paid by theregional health executive.

We must introduce clarity and equality to thearea. If the Tanaiste and Minister for Health andChildren says to me that in certain areas of the


[Mr. Neville.]country nursing homes are much more expensivethan in others, that is a fair argument. We needtransparent information to show why the ratesshould be different, but there is no such infor-mation or analysis. It is done on an ad hoc basisin each health board area. If, as it now transpires,the disparity between nursing home costs is notas pronounced as some years ago, with prices formany nursing homes across the country reachingthe levels found in the former Eastern HealthBoard area, there is a need for a full and compre-hensive examination of subventions and pay-ments for the different categories, including thebasic and enhanced payments.

I would like to raise the repayments of moneysto those illegally charged in nursing homes. I willdeal with one area for the purpose of illustrationand leave those who are psychiatrically ill andperhaps long-term in-patients. I understand — Ihope the Minister will correct me if I am wrong— that a person must claim for the repaymentthat he or she is owed by filling in and signingforms. Some might not be aware of that or com-petent to do so. The State has an onus and legalresponsibility to repay the moneys owed to every-one. If I have moneys and owe someone, I havea restitutive responsibility to repay him or her.

I would appreciate the Tanaiste explaining theprocedure for making the payments. If it is aform-filling exercise, those more informed andable will be in a position to avail themselves oftheir rights, but those whom I have mentioned,who have a disability, including an intellectualone, or are in long-term psychiatric care, will beless likely to claim and receive their entitlements.

I would also like to quote from Age andOpportunity regarding how we approach age,ageism and the elderly.

Focusing on aging as representing a constel-lation of problems that require interventionsignores older people’s own resilience in theface of difficulties and their own capacity withproper resources for organising themselves anddevising their own solutions at the individualand collective level.

We miss out on that where the dignity of elderlypeople is interfered with. Someone is ill in ahospital and there is a decision to make becausehe or she can no longer live in the communityand must go to a public or private nursing or wel-fare home. There is a debate between the consult-ants, the family and the hospital ward, but theelderly person is not often consulted. The quo-tation concerns the need to ensure the elderly areconsulted and recognised rather than disregardedas an adjunct to a problem; that should nothappen.

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): I am pleased to commend this shortBill to the House. It has two purposes, to putreasonable charges for long-stay care on a legalbasis and to provide hundreds of thousands of

people on low incomes with the opportunity tovisit their GPs without worrying about the cost.

Both purposes are guided by the single keyprinciple that there should be legal clarity regard-ing public services and charges. Members of thepublic, patients and their families deserve no less.It is not tolerable that people, particularly vulner-able people and those suffering from ill health,should be uncertain of whether they qualify for aservice, or whether and how much they shouldhave to contribute towards the cost. People work-ing in our health services can do a professionalpublic service job if they operate in an envir-onment of legal clarity.

In an increasingly litigious society, legal uncer-tainty is tested and exploited in many ways thatare, to say the least, not always in the publicinterest. The cost to the public and taxpayer ofachieving legal clarity is highest when it comesfrom protracted and repeated litigation. The costis lowest when it comes from coherent policy,meticulous law-making and professional publicadministration.

That is why the Government welcomed theclarity provided by the recent decision of theSupreme Court about past charges for publiclong-stay places. I do not intend to dwell on thepoints I made when the House debated thatdecision two weeks ago. I will just say that thisBill stems from the Government’s determinationto provide legal clarity in the interests of patients,their families, taxpayers and better public admin-istration.

On the repayment of past charges, the Govern-ment is working on a scheme of repayments thatwill be efficient, user-friendly and as automatic aspossible. There are many practical and legalissues to be worked out in handling the repay-ments. It is important that people keep firmly inmind that the Supreme Court has found thatrepayments should be made and that the Govern-ment fully accepts that. The Supreme Court hasdecided there is no need now for people to go toanother court. I assure Deputies that persons whowere being charged need not employ a solicitorto get what they are owed. I look forward tobringing details of the repayment scheme to theHouse as soon as possible.

We could all agree that the full context for therepayments issue will only be known when thereport by Mr. John Travers is available. It makeslittle sense to debate that report in advance of itbeing completed, let alone published. I expect toreceive the report tomorrow and I will bring itquickly to the Government next Tuesday and tothe House, as I have already indicated.

On some of the points made by DeputyNeville, the intention is that where we can iden-tify people we will pay them their moneys. It willnot be a question of making applications and soon. In the case of deceased persons, somebodywill have to prove that they were the representa-tive of that person. For those who are alive butof unsound mind, and as I have already indicatedpublicly, the Statute of Limitations cannot be


applied to people of unsound mind. My viewwould be that we would identify those personsand repay their moneys.

This is a mammoth task for the State. We havenever engaged in an exercise of this kind beforein terms of the scale. We will need some outsideexpertise, perhaps even from outside the country,to help us with the task because in other juris-dictions people have handled mass claims in thepast and they would have a good deal of experi-ence. That could be of invaluable assistance tothe Government. When the Travers report is tohand, hopefully tomorrow, we will be in a betterposition to indicate the nature of any scheme wewill introduce, the timeframes and so on.

My colleague, the Minister of State, DeputySean Power, opened the debate with a detaileddescription of the main provisions of the Bill. Iwould like to concentrate on the policies behindit. There is close to all-party consensus in theHouse that it is reasonable that people in publiclong-term stay places should make some contri-bution, where possible, to living costs or shelterand maintenance. That policy has been in placehere for almost 50 years. That consensus is clear,given that the policy was implemented by success-ive Governments and Ministers for Health, albeiton a legally flawed basis, for the past 29 years. Itis also clear from public debate and debates inthis House in the past three months that mostpeople accept it is fair to require a reasonableamount to be contributed, considering especiallythat older people living at home must meet theirliving expenses from their pensions.

I was pleased that the constitutionality of legis-lating for these charges going forward was fullytested in the Supreme Court and was found bythe court to be constitutional. For example, thecourt stated: “In authorising the Minister toimpose charges on the specified category of per-son, the Oireachtas clearly intended that theresources of the Health Boards would benefit soas to better enable them to provide the servicesin question while at the same time seeking toavoid doing so in a manner which would causeundue hardship.”

The court further stated:

The level at which charges can be fixed bythe Minister is narrow in scope ranging from anominal charge to 80% of the pension ... It wasclearly the intention of the Oireachtas that anycharges would not cause undue hardship gener-ally or in individual cases and no doubt that iswhy it fixed the maximum charge at 80% ofthe pension.

It was useful that the court recognised the import-ance of this source of funding for health services,which is in the order of \2 million to \2.5 millionper week. I have heard suggestions from theOpposition, however, that section 1 of the Billmay be unconstitutional. I am obliged to acceptthe advice of the Attorney General’s office onthis legislation, and we believe the Bill is consti-tutional. Ultimately, Bills are tested in the

Supreme Court, perhaps under an Article 26 ref-erence, which is what happened with the Bill wepassed before Christmas, or in particular cir-cumstances.

Section 1 refers to the Health Service Execu-tive taking into account a person’s overall finan-cial situation, including the means of a spouse, inmaking a decision on eligibility for a medicalcard. Yesterday, the Minister of State, DeputySean Power, set out the reasons for this provisionin the Bill. It reflects existing law, policy andpractice and is based on long-standing consti-tutional principles that recognise the obligation ofone spouse to support another. It is not unconsti-tutional.

Again, for the purposes of clarity I inform theHouse that I intend to bring forward an amend-ment in the Bill on Committee Stage to repealsection 140 of the Social Welfare (Consolidation)Act 1993. This is to prevent anomalous chargesbeing raised through other legislation which arenot in line with the exemptions provided for inthe Bill now before the House. This will securethe exemption from charges of those personsinvoluntarily detained in mental hospitals and itis necessary to ensure consistency in this regardin future.

The provisions of the Bill on long-term staycharges are clear and unambiguous. The Bill isbeing brought forward in the light of the positivedecision of the Supreme Court on exactly similarprovisions in the 2004 Bill.

I am pleased also to use this Bill to propose tothe House section 4 providing for new medicalcards to make general practitioner services freefor many thousands of people. This is an inno-vation for social justice and for the effective useof public resources. For many years, we all shareda concern that people on very low income shouldnot be deterred from visiting their GP on costgrounds. In particular, we have agreed thatparents should not be deterred on cost groundsfrom bringing their children to their GP. TheGovernment is now acting to address thoseconcerns.

The traditional medial card will continue to beheld by 85% of medical card holders but with thispolicy, the same budget allows us to provide fourtimes as many people with free access to their GPthan with the traditional medical card. There areno industrial relations, administrative or legalbarriers to doing that once we have passed thislegislation. All we need is this short legislationamending primary legislation to establish a legalbasis for doing so. If, as I hope, the legislation isapproved by the Oireachtas this month, theHealth Service Executive will be in a position toissue the new medical cards in April.

The policy of the Government is clear. We areproviding the resources to fund these new cards.We are bringing forward the legislation to under-pin the new cards. We want to see people takingup the new cards. We want people to visit theirdoctor and bring their children to the doctor asoften as needed.


[Ms Harney.]I intend to monitor closely the uptake of the

new cards to ensure that the many thousands ofpeople to whom we wish to give cards apply forand receive them. As Deputies will be aware,income guidelines are set for the Health ServiceExecutive for eligibility for medical cards of bothcategories. These income guidelines are set on thebasis of the best and latest information availableon incomes and expenditure in the population.The income guidelines for new medical cards are25% higher than for the traditional medical card.

It remains difficult, however, to set any incomeguidelines based on historic data to achieve anexact number of people to be covered prospec-tively. If we find significantly fewer people thanexpected take up the new cards because incomesare growing faster than we anticipate, we willrevise the guidelines.

We are providing the budget, the admin-istration and now the legislation so there is nobarrier to the policy being implemented. TheGovernment wants to make it easy for people toapply for these cards and to use them. I know theHSE will do all it can to ensure that happens,including constructive discussions with the IrishMedical Organisation on implementation.

Providing GP cover to many thousands morepeople in this way is effective social justice. Weare providing graduated benefits according toincome. It is much better that State benefits arenot “all or nothing”. We know from our experi-ence of reducing unemployment how important itis, for social justice reasons as much as anythingelse, to avoid poverty traps. Graduated benefitsare a fair and effective way to help people atdifferent levels of income.

We are using scarce public resources to helpthose who need help, not those who can ably pro-vide for themselves. The alternative to chan-nelling resources to people most in need is “onefor everyone in the audience”. I do not agree withthat. To give everybody a medical card, at anaverage of approximately \1,000 a year, wouldcost an extra \3 billion over and above the cur-rent position. I have not heard any party openlypropose tax increases of \3 billion to pay formedical cards for all, and I doubt I will ever hearit from parties who are serious about being inGovernment.

The policy of the Government is based on acoherent and integrated view of economic andsocial progress. The new medical card is oneinnovation within the strategy and I hope it willstand the test of time for many thousands ofpeople in the years ahead.

Deputy Neville raised a number of matters inconnection with the Health Service Executive.The executive has only been in existence for twomonths and does not yet have its full cohort ofstaff. It is intended that it will have a fullyresourced public affairs division to deal withpublic representatives. I have spoken to the act-ing CEO and the chairman and they are anxiousto establish the division as soon as possible. It is

hoped it will be up and running, if not before thesummer then shortly thereafter. As regards a rolefor public representatives at regional level, wewill progress that matter as soon as possible.

I intend to pursue many of the issues — incon-tinence pads etc. — to which Deputy Nevillereferred. I will reflect on what were people’sentitlements and communicate further with theDeputy. We cannot have a situation where, inrespect of people who require institutional care,particularly in the private sector, families will notbe given support to allow them to care for elderlyrelatives at home. If a mistake was made in thepast it was that too many of the resources wenttowards the institutional side and too few towardshome or community support.

I hope the Government will be able to finaliseits views and policy perspectives in respect oflong-term care later in the year. Currently, 12,000people reach the age of 65 and 1,500 reach theage of 80 every year. There will be major demo-graphic issues for society going forward in termsof how it funds care of the elderly. Greateremphasis must be placed on community andfamily support because we could not afford, as asociety, to fund institutional care for everyone.We must, therefore, have institutional care whereit is necessary and unavoidable which will be sup-ported but we must also give serious consider-ation to how we might support further activity inthe community. Currently, the home care andhome help systems are in place. The new homecare package, which forms part of the overall A&E package, is a start in terms of trying to helppeople to remain at home with their families.That is when people do best in medical terms andare happiest. If they wish to remain at home,people deserve to be able to do so.

Mr. S. Ryan: I propose to share time withDeputy Upton.

This Bill is typical of the careless and possiblyeven negligent approach the Department ofHealth and Children takes in respect of people’srights and entitlements to health care. It dealswith two issues, namely, entitlement to a “mini”or “yellow pack” medical card and the way inwhich long-stay charges will operate in future. Aswe know from the shocking saga that unfolded inrecent months, these two issues are closely linked.

I wish to deal first with the matter of long-staycharges. The Tanaiste is basically proposing toreintroduce those aspects of the ill-fated Health(Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2004 which theSupreme Court found were not unconstitutional.That Bill was put through the House in a dis-gracefully short time. There is no reason for asimilar approach to be taken in respect of thelegislation before us. There is also no reason tosimply reintroduce the same provisions. We havean opportunity, of which we should avail, toimprove on them. The main proposal is thatpeople entering long-stay care should be chargeda maximum of 80% of their old age pension. We


cannot decide if this is fair and equitable until weknow who is entitled to such care.

The proposed arrangements for charging willmean an old person whose only income is a socialwelfare pension will pay the same as someonewho has another source of income or possessesprivate means. The majority of people who enterpublic long-stay care only have their basic pen-sion. However, the right to avail of public long-stay care is, in theory at least, available to every-one. There are not nearly enough places to caterfor this need. There is no legal provision for ameans test to obtain access to such care. Theassessment is supposed to be on the basis of needof care. As is usual in the health service, the con-ditions regarding entitlement are not at all clearand the health boards, even though they areobliged to do so under the Freedom of Infor-mation Acts, have failed to publish informationabout the conditions attached.

Before we can decide what is a fair and equit-able regime for charging people for care, weshould know who is entitled to avail of that care.The Bill should deal with that entitlement andthen proceed to deal with charging. The Govern-ment is refusing to deal with the basic entitlementbecause to do so would mean it would be obligedto acknowledge what we all know, namely, thatthe only people entitled to public long-stay careare those on very low incomes. Not even all ofthose to whom I refer are in a position to accessthis care. The failure to clarify entitlements ledto the current difficulties arising. The continuingfailure to do so can only lead to further problemsin the future.

On the specific issue of how charges are to beassessed, it is not acceptable to grant an olderperson access to only 20% of their old age pen-sion. An older person in care should be able tobuy items such as clothing, a few drinks, ciga-rettes, sweets or presents for their grandchildren.Is this too much for them to expect? They shouldbe able to access at least 25% of their pensionsfor this purpose.

There are older people in need of long-termcare in public facilities in areas of Dublin who arefacing a waiting period of up to 12.5 years. Thatis a ridiculous situation and it should not beallowed to continue. Many elderly people arebeing forced to remain at home and rely onfamily support at a time when community careand home help services are being cut back. Inaddition, hundreds of acute hospital beds arebeing occupied by elderly people who do notrequire that level of care and this means thatthose who need a hospital bed are forced to waiteven longer. This is happening at a time whenbeds are available in private nursing homes. TheTanaiste has made some progress on this matter.However, the level of that progress has not beensufficient. I accept that older people would preferto live in their home environments. In circum-stances, however, where they must enter care, itis totally unacceptable that they should beobliged to wait up to 12.5 years to do so. The

waiting period to which I refer is a fact; not afigment of my imagination.

12 o’clock

The charging arrangements will not only applyto older people, they will also apply to those withintellectual disabilities in long-stay care and to

those with mental illnesses who arevoluntary patients in such care. Manyof these will be receiving disability

allowance which is considerably less than the oldage pension. Recipients of disability allowancecould be left with about \18 if the maximumcharge is applied. This is totally unacceptable.Some disability allowance recipients are only incare for five days a week. How are they expectedto survive for the other two days?

The Tanaiste will probably say this is themaximum, but the legislation should ensure thateveryone affected can retain at least 25% of hisor her payment. The Tanaiste will probably sayshe intends to do that by regulation, but theseguidelines should be included in the primarylegislation. We have had enough trouble overregulations in this area in the past. Unless theentitlement to retain a minimum income is in theprimary legislation, the people concerned will bedependent on the discretion of the Health ServiceExecutive not to apply the maximum charge.That is totally unacceptable. Certain mattersought not to be subject to the discretion of theGovernment or its agencies and one of these isthe right to a basic level of income. While theexercise of discretion may be appropriate in somecases, the record of the health boards in applyingdiscretionary provisions was abysmal, to say theleast. They effectively avoided exercising theirstatutory discretion in the awarding of medicalcards and allowed the Department of Health andChildren to decide who should get them. Perhapsthe HSE will take a different view, but somehowI doubt it.

There are other problems which this legislationdoes not address. The practice of taking pensionbooks from long-stay residents should stopimmediately. The residents should have controlover their money and pay the charges which arelevied in the same way as every other service userdoes. The legislation does not deal with the diffi-cult issues which arise in the case of people whoare unable to manage their own money. Thearrangements by the Department of Social andFamily Affairs for agents to deal with pensionsare just not good enough. They do not respect thedignity and autonomy of individual older peopleand the agents are not subject to any form ofsupervision as regards how they use that money.This is a major concern.

The Bill proposes some minor changes toentitlements to a medical card — the “real” medi-cal card. The legislation does not address theproblems which have been identified in severalreports on this matter. It was interesting to hearthe Tanaiste in her contribution make referenceto the fact that nobody in this House wasexpounding the right of medical cards for all. Shewas trying to wash her hands as regards the com-


[Mr. S. Ryan.]mitment given by this Fianna Fail-PD Govern-ment prior to the last general election when itpromised to extend medical card eligibility to anadditional 200,000 on low incomes. The reality isthat medical card cover has fallen by 100,000since the general election.

Mr. Browne: Unlike the Deputy’sGovernment.

Mr. S. Ryan: I am not pulling the figures out ofthe air. This is according to figures given throughparliamentary questions.

Mr. Browne: It is because so many people areworking.

Mr. S. Ryan: The Minister will say, of course,that people are becoming wealthier and that theirincomes are increasing, putting them above thequalification threshold. This is utter balderdash.

Mr. Stanton: It is balderdash.

Mr. S. Ryan: Average industrial earnings areup 50% since 1997, while the income thresholdfor medical cards is up by 27%.

Mr. Browne: Balderdash.

Mr. S. Ryan: The medical card qualifying thres-hold is not even keeping pace with earnings,which is part of the problem. These so-called“yellow packs” or doctor-only cards are a cop-out. They will only entitle people on low incomesto have free access to a general practitioner. Theyhave little to offer the person who will be left withthe cost of prescription drugs, a public hospitalbed, out-patient services and other charges. TheGovernment has promised 30,000 of these “yel-low pack” cards, but not one has materialised sofar. The legislation providing for them was onlyintroduced in the Dail this week.

The Minister of State at the Department ofHealth and Children, Deputy Sean Power, in hisintroduction said the “yellow pack” card quotawould be increased for people who were 25%over the medical card income guideline. For acouple under the age of 66 the medical cardincome guideline is \222. Another 25% on thatdoes not even reach the minimum wage level andthere is no commitment to try to keep that in linewith any of the guidelines being referred to,whether it is the increase in health costs, in theaverage industrial wage or basic social welfarepayments. As matters stand, more and morepeople will be taken out of the medical cardsystem. There is a perception that this is the firststep towards doing away with what we would callthe free medical card system. In this context, it isinteresting to note the drop in medical card coverbetween 1997 and 2005 in all counties — Dublin,Wicklow, Laois, Longford, Offaly, Westmeath,Clare, Limerick, Tipperary North——

Mr. Browne: What about Wexford?

Mr. S. Ryan: ——Cavan, Louth, Meath——

Mr. Browne: The Deputy is on a tour of thecountry.

Mr. S. Ryan: Indeed, the constituents of Meathwill be made very well aware of the neglect andbroken promises by this Government as regardsmedical cards. Monaghan, Donegal, Leitrim,Sligo, Carlow, Kilkenny, Waterford, Wexford,Cork, Kerry, Galway, Mayo and Roscommon allhave seen a massive reduction in the number ofmedical card recipients in the period between1997 and 2005. This is a cop-out and the Ministerof State knows it. This legislation does not go farenough. I would like more time to deal with thismatter.

Ms Upton: I thank Deputy Ryan for sharingtime.

I want to concentrate on one issue that arisesfrom the consequence of the lack of suitable andaffordable care for elderly people, either at homeor in nursing homes. The Minister will be awareof the Pollack report on cystic fibrosis, which waspublished recently. It was quite damning of theservices and facilities that are provided for suchpatients. In particular, I would like to refer to aletter sent to me by a young man named Simon.He is 23 years old and he refers in his letter toSaint Vincent’s hospital:

The ward which has been allocated to us isnow being used for older men and women whoare awaiting beds in old folks’ homes andhospitals. Because of this, cystic fibrosispatients are suffering as we cannot get beds. Atthe moment, there are three six bed rooms forwomen and one six bed and one three bedroom for men. Of these 27 beds, the majorityare taken up by older men and women whodo not suffer with cystic fibrosis, which is a lifethreatening illness. Some of these olderpatients can be on this ward for up to one year.Complaints have been made to our specialistteam and we are told it is down to bed manage-ment and overcrowding at the hospitals, yet noone seems to be doing anything to alleviate thishardship being placed on cystic fibrosispatients. This problem has been going on foryears at this hospital.

He goes on to refer to another ward, which henames:

I could not open a window due to the factthat I was put in with five elderly male patientsand the heat was suffocating. This does nothelp me as a sufferer with an illness which islife threatening.

I quoted specifically from this letter because itrefers to the fact that acute beds are being allo-cated, of necessity, to older people who should bein another environment, either at home, in thecommunity or in a suitable nursing home. It is not


fair either to those older people, who should bein a different environment. It is certainly not fairto the medical and nursing staff in that ward whoare stretched to the absolute limit to deliver aquality service to all of the patients with verydifferent needs. Most definitely, it is wrong thatyoung patients suffering with cystic fibrosis arecompromised and are susceptible to cross infec-tions. Their lives are literally being put at risk duein part to being placed in inappropriate wards.This is because beds are taken up by older peoplewho should be in a completely differentenvironment.

In that hospital, a new wing has been built. Ido not know the purpose of that new wing but ithas been vacant for months and probably longerthan that. Why is that part of the hospital unoccu-pied? If it were made available, there could besome rearrangement, relocation and alternativemanagement that would allow a structure to beput in place to alleviate the situation. Olderpeople could be moved to a different envir-onment and beds freed up for acute patientswhich are urgently needed. It is not the fault ofthe elderly patients that they are taking up bedsin these acute wards. The facilities available areso inappropriate and so undersubscribed forkeeping people in the community and in theirown homes that it is impossible for families tomanage that. It is impossible for many elderlypeople to deal with the bureaucracy that sur-rounds accessing those facilities. While it is goodthat this issue is raised in the Bill, the Tanaisteshould look very carefully at those facilities pro-vided in the community, or the lack of them.There is a lack of home help and a shortage ofgrants for disabled persons and elderly people toallow them live in comfort in their own homes.This could free up facilities that should be avail-able for acute patients.

Mr. Nolan: I wish to share time with DeputyCallanan.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on thislegislation. It is the second time we have seenlegislation of this type come before the House inthe past few months. It is unfortunate that wenow must have a second debate on this issue. TheBill sets down the legal framework for the pay-ment for inpatient stay in publicly funded long-term residential care. Any fair minded personwould see nothing wrong with the contributionbeing made by individuals or their families for thecost of the first class care that older people aregetting in our long-stay residential care units. Anunfortunate situation has arisen as the SupremeCourt has struck down the previous legislation,which means we are debating this Bill for asecond time.

Most Deputies who have spoken on this legis-lation agree with the need for it. Paymenttowards the cost of shelter and maintenance inlong-stay institutions is something on which allparties agree. One aspect of this particular pay-ment has not been highlighted enough. While

charges will be made from now on to individualswho are in the position to pay, the State will pickup the vast bulk of the cost for patients who arestaying in long-term residential centres. A recentreport stated that the State is picking up around90% of the cost. The Supreme Court has con-firmed that it is in order for the Minister to legis-late for charging patients.

The second part of this Bill deals with theintroduction of medical cards for doctor visitsonly. This is a commitment which has been givenby the Government and which was announcedlast November. A total of 200,000 individuals willbenefit as a result of the introduction of thisscheme. Previously I have spoken about incomelimits for qualification for medical cards. Previousspeakers outlined the fact that the number ofmedical cards issued over the last few years hasdecreased. This is due to the relative wealth ofthe population nowadays. Having said that, thereare cases of hardship in families where individualsmight be marginally over the income limits for amedical card. While the health board has a discre-tion on individual applications, it would be betterif there was a greater increase in the incomelimits for medical card qualifications. The Mini-ster has stated that the new income limits for thedoctor only card will be 25% higher than thequalification limit for existing full medical cards.I know of families who are marginally over thelimit and have to pay \40 to \50 to visit thedoctor. They also have the cost of medication ontop of that. Many of the 200,000 recipients of thenew cards may only go to the doctor and maynot need medication following the visit. However,there is certainly a case to be made to look againat the income limits.

The Minister hopes that 30,000 additionalpeople will obtain the standard medical card dur-ing the current year. Ministers in their statementswill have acknowledged that people should notbe discouraged from visiting their family doctorson grounds of cost. The introduction of the200,000 cards will increase the number of peoplewho avail of the opportunity to visit a doctor.

In the context of the inclusion in the Bill ofinpatient-stay payments, we should acknowledgethe work done by voluntary organisations in car-ing for the elderly. As the numbers in religiousorders fall, we should recognise the role theyhave played over the years. In their place are anumber of new voluntary organisations themembers of which are carrying out a great deal offine work. They are being provided with practicalsupport by the Ministers for Health and Children,Social and Family Affairs and Finance, the last ofwhom provides much needed funding to thebodies in question.

I was glad to hear the Tanaiste state on thebehalf of the Government the intention to makeit as easy as possible for people who were over-charged for nursing home care to obtain refunds.I am concerned, however, to ensure that we donot see a repeat of the scenario of Army deafnessclaims. While individuals claimed and received


[Mr. Nolan.]compensation to which they were entitled fordeafness resulting from Army service, much ofthe funding made available by the State was paidto the legal profession. I would not like to seeunscrupulous members of the profession gettingtheir hands on the funding being made availableas the acknowledged due of the people affectedin this instance.

The Tanaiste has established a body to reviewthe medical card system under a number of head-ings. The management and control of the GMSregister is one of the matters under consideration.We have seen press reports in recent months thatindividuals who were long since deceasedremained on the GMS register. It is a subjectwhich must be examined given the potential sav-ings to the Department. The administrative pro-cess and standards are also being considered bythe review body. While I can speak only aboutthe former South Eastern Health Board area, itappears that the processing and administration ofthe medical cards system are efficiently and prop-erly carried out by officials. An area in whichthere seems to be a problem, however, involves alack of resources to deal with the backlog ofappeals. It is unfortunate that congestion existswhich leaves families on the medical card waitinglist for months.

I wish the Tanaiste success in processing thelegislation through the House. I hope shedevelops a simple formula which can be appliedby individuals who wish to claim repayments as aresult of last week’s Supreme Court judgment.

Mr. Callanan: I support the Bill which providesfor the introduction of doctor-only medical cardsand the making of small deductions from the oldage pensions of people in welfare homes.

I congratulate the Tanaiste on the introductionof doctor-only medical cards for people onincomes above the full medical card thresholds.The cards will facilitate free doctor visits for asignificant number of families on low to mediumincomes. The families will also be able to obtainfree drugs above the \85 per month, or approxi-mately \21 per week, threshold of the drugsrefund scheme. Doctor-only medical cards are anaspect of a great scheme which is demonstrativeof the way the Government looks after the lesswell-off who find it difficult to meet the cost ofdoctor visits.

I welcome the increase in the income thres-holds for ordinary medical cards which willextend eligibility to a greater number of people.I ask the Tanaiste to examine the possibility ofproviding medical cards to all students. As sheknows, students do not have much money in theirpockets and doctor visits may prove costly forthem. The former provision of medical cards toall students was discontinued by a Labour PartyMinister.

I compliment the welfare homes in my area ofeast Galway on the excellent care they provide topatients. The Tanaiste visited St. Brendan’s

Home in Loughrea where she saw at first handthe quality of care provided. She witnessed thehome’s problematic upstairs accommodation andpromised to give a high priority to the provisionat the home of the very necessary 60-bed unit torelieve the dangerous conditions for parents whomust stay at the building. The 60-bed unit and thecommunity welfare home at Ballinasloe formedpart of the national development plan and theplan for the former Western Health Board area.Ballinasloe has been promised a community wel-fare home for 20 years. Will the Tanaiste approvethe projects to proceed? There is strong demandin Tuam for the provision of a communityhospital. I recognise that the Tanaiste is consider-ing various ways to provide it as a step-downfacility to relieve the great pressure on Galway’stwo city hospitals.

A few night’s ago, I attended a meeting of nurs-ing home owners concerned at the level of sub-vention paid in the HSE’s western area as againstthe level paid in the east coast area. A subventionof only \228 is paid in the west as opposed to\520 on the east coast. It is unfair as there is littledifference between costs in each area. Will theTanaiste consider the matter as some of thesmaller nursing homes in the west find it very dif-ficult to survive? I am strongly of the opinion thathome-based subventions should be introduced togive elderly people the choice to remain in theirhomes for as long as possible. Given the choice,most elderly people would prefer to be cared forat home.

While I accept that changes in income dis-regards for carer’s allowance have been of greathelp and I thank the Minister for Social andFamily Affairs, Deputy Brennan, for them, manyelderly people are not connected to a person eli-gible for the allowance to care for them. If suchelderly persons were provided with home-basedsubvention, they could pay for the care to allowthem to remain at home for as long as possible.

Social services do great work in caring for theelderly which is not properly recognised. In mostcases, it is the work of social services which allowselderly people to remain at home through theprovision of meals on wheels to remote areas andtransport to centres for the elderly at whichpeople can enjoy a hot meal and the company offriends in a social setting. Much of the work iscarried out voluntarily. I acknowledge the workthat is done for the elderly and call on theTanaiste to provide as much funding as possibleto social services. Last year, the then Minister,Deputy Martin, provided a new minibus for Port-umna social services to transport older peoplefrom remote areas to centres for the elderly. Itwas a great addition to system. Under the direc-tion of Sr. Alacoque, Ballinasloe social servicesmake a significant contribution in my local area.I acknowledge also the great work being carriedout by public health nurses who must provide ser-vices of all sorts when they visit patients. Theyare well able to do their jobs.


I ask the Tanaiste to clarify the position onrefunds of charges for nursing home care for pen-sioners with medical cards who are or were inprivate nursing homes. Are they entitled to arefund? I take the opportunity to acknowledgethe work of the previous Minister, DeputyMartin, for the health service. I voice my supportfor the Tanaiste in her efforts to provide qualityhealth services for young and old. While it is adifficult task, a good woman, born in Ballinasloe,is well able for the challenge.

Mr. Crowe: I wish to share time with DeputiesFinian McGrath, McHugh and Gormley.

Through this Bill, the Government is actingswiftly to ensure that long-stay patients in resi-dential care who can be charged in the wake ofthe Supreme Court judgment will now be chargedwithout further delay. The Government states ithas lost \2 million per week in payments sincethe charges were found to be illegal and it hasbeen very quick to clear up this part of the equ-ation, but we are still in the dark regarding manyother matters. What about the money lost topeople who were wrongly charged? How will theybe reimbursed?

My office has been inundated with queriesfrom families with elderly relatives in nursinghomes. The common denominators are wordssuch as “hardship”, “difficulty” and “smallincome”. It might be a small amount but it rep-resents a huge difference in quality of life forpeople in nursing homes. These families want toknow what their position is now and what theymust do to receive their entitlements. The help-line established by the Health Service Executiveseems constantly engaged. The Government mustdo much more to inform people and must makehard decisions as soon as possible about howpeople will be repaid the money that was takenfrom them illegally.

The Dail has not been given the informationby the Government. The Minister for Health andChildren said the Government got legal advice asfar back as 1978 stating that the legal basis of thecharges was not sound. This is an amazing admis-sion and a damning indictment of successiveGovernments. The Minister should publish theadvice from 1978 given to her predecessors, aswell as the 80-page legal opinion sent by theSouth Eastern Health Board to the Departmentin 2002. Why did her predecessors, since 1978,including the Minister, Deputy Martin, not act?The Oireachtas and, more importantly, the publicand relatives of the elderly have a right to know.

The second part of the Bill implements theGovernment decision to introduce the GP-onlymedical card. This was announced in Novemberand, with the Estimates and budget, flagged asone of the great initiatives of the new caring,sharing coalition. I welcome the extension of theentitlement to free GP services to more people.Sinn Fein has called and campaigned for this, afact about which my constituency colleague,Deputy O’Connor, should have no doubt.

However, I question the attempt to present thisas a fulfilment of the promise made by FiannaFail and the Progressive Democrats before the2002 general election.

It does not fulfil that promise for two reasons.First, these are second-class medical cards whichhave been described as “yellow pack” and not thereal thing and certainly not of the same quality.They only cover GP visits and represent a quarterof the value of the real medical card. Second, theGovernment is once again playing a numbersgame in an effort to con the public. More than100,000 people have lost their medical card sincethis coalition first took office in 1997. Almost65,000 people have lost their medical cards since2002. If the Government is claiming to stick byits word, the figures do not add up.

More important than figures are the realpeople who need access to health services. Theyare all our constituents. Their income is above thevery low level of the medical card income guide-lines and they cannot afford private healthinsurance. Many of them may now qualify for theGP-only card, but they must still pay the cost ofmedicines up to the value of \85 per month afteryet another increase imposed by the Govern-ment. They must still pay hospital charges.

Yesterday a Deputy pointed out that thenumber of medical card holders with full entitle-ments will possibly decrease and will be graduallyreplaced by those entitled to GP-only cards. Thiswould represent a significant cutting back inpublic health services, a situation which must befought tooth and nail.

There is no consistency in the Government’shealth policy. A few years ago it granted themedical card to all those over the age of 70regardless of their circumstances. That is finebecause in doing so it recognised the principle ofequal access to health services for all. However,this only applied to those over the age of 70. Avery wealthy retired person on a large pension isentitled to free medical care, whereas a familywith young children, struggling to survive weekto week, must be almost destitute before qualify-ing for free medicine and medical care. It doesnot make sense.

A 2003 survey showed that 33% of men and45% of women identified financial problems asthe greatest factor preventing them from improv-ing their health. This sums up the inequality atthe heart of the health service and this Bill willdo nothing to challenge that.

Mr. F. McGrath: I am grateful for the oppor-tunity to speak on this extremely important legis-lation. It is about the charging of residents ofpublic nursing homes up to 80% of their pensionsfor long-term care and provides for the introduc-tion of doctor-only medical cards for 200,000 onlow incomes. This issue was a fiasco from thestart, and all major political parties must takeresponsibility as it happened on their watch. It isa disgrace and now we have rushed legislation todock 80% of the old age pension. Most people


[Mr. F. McGrath.]do not mind making a contribution, but 80% is ascandal and a rip-off of the elderly who haveserved this nation well over the years. It ischeapskate politics and lacks compassion andcare for the elderly.

I challenge the role of the Minister of State,Deputy Callely, regarding the issue. He waspresent at the crucial meeting in December 2003when the issue of illegal health charges was dis-cussed. He was Minister of State at the Depart-ment of Health and Children with responsibilityfor the elderly at that time. Why did he stay sil-ent? What did he know? What did he do aboutit? What illegal advice was he given? It happenedunder his watch as Minister of State. If he has afew minutes, after being down in the Port tunnel,which has caused damage to 185 homes under hisnew watch, perhaps he will explain why he turnedhis back on the elderly over the past 12 months.

Let us look at the Minister of State’s record onthe elderly while he was in office. During hisreign, approximately 440,000, or 11% of theState’s population, were over 65 years of age. Ofthese, approximately 266,000 were over the ageof 70 and one third of these lived on their own.Some 25,000 elderly people were in long-staybeds or nursing homes and a further 13,000needed high to maximum dependency care andcontinued to live at home.

It is the wish of the majority of elderly peopleto receive care at home or in the community, aconcept which I support. Many families of theelderly make sacrifices to provide the best poss-ible care. The inadequacy of the nursing homesubvention causes great hardship for manyfamilies, as do the cuts in home help carried outunder the Minister of State’s term in office. Thefailure to abolish the means test for the carer’sallowance is a further attack on the most vulner-able in our society. Day care centres serving theelderly and disadvantaged communities weregrossly under-resourced under the Minister ofState’s watch.

The Government must immediately put inplace adequate resources and a comprehensiveinfrastructure for care of the elderly. This is theMinister of State’s record, and he is at it again.This is not a personal attack, it is a politicalattack. He should get the boot for his record andhe should bring the Minister for Transport,Deputy Cullen, with him.

I support Deputy Connolly’s position on amoratorium on the withdrawal of the medicalcard for existing card holders. We must also lookat marginal cases who will get the doctor-onlycard and clarify the legal position regarding medi-cal card holders in private nursing homes. Interms of money owed, £1 in 1976 is now worth\9.36. That is the reality and the Governmentmust not to be stingy to our elderly. It is pay-backtime, and time to give our elderly maximum careand support.

Mr. McHugh: I welcome the opportunity tospeak on this Bill, which is relatively small butvery relevant following the recent Supreme Courtdecision. We owe a debt of gratitude to PresidentMcAleese for initiating the referral to theSupreme Court of the most recent legislationdealing with nursing home charges. That actionundoubtedly saved many people much angst ifthey felt a compulsion to have the legislationtested in the courts. At least we now know thatwhen this legislation is passed, as I presume it willbe, the future basis for nursing home charges willbe put on a firm foundation. One of the peculiari-ties of this House is the irrelevance of the contri-butions made at times when discussing legislation.This occasion is no exception. The Bill is specificand deals with only two issues: long-term staycharges and doctor-only medical cards. Asregards charges, the issue is whether people whocan afford to should pay a contribution. If thatprinciple is accepted, and it is one that I support,then we should go ahead and implement it. Theblame game for the fiasco that was first dis-covered 11 Governments ago will have anotherairing when the Travers report is published.Recriminations should be left to another daybecause while we squabble here, the taxpayermust foot the bill to the tune of approximately\2.5 million per week.

There has been an attempt to lay the blame forthis fiasco at the Tanaiste’s door merely becauseshe is the current Minister for Health and Chil-dren. That is disingenuous to say the least; dis-honest would be a more accurate description. Weshould not lose sight of the fact that DeputyHarney was the only Minister who acted whenthe matter was brought to her attention. This,however, is a discussion for another time, afterthe publication of the Travers report. So also isthe issue of repayments of what we now knowwere illegal charges.

There is a question concerning those who hadto go to private nursing homes because they couldnot be accommodated in public nursing homes.The position of such people needs to be clarifiedin the interest of fairness.

The legislation also deals with doctor-onlymedical cards. While any action that helps peopleon low incomes deal with their daily bills is wel-come, it is regrettable that the cards will not coverthe cost of prescriptions. Doctor-only medicalcards will certainly not fulfil the commitmentmade to provide an additional 200,000 medicalcards. That commitment related to full medicalcards, not half ones.

While attempting to focus my commentsspecifically on the legislation, I cannot allow theoccasion to pass without agreeing with my con-stituency colleague, Deputy Callanan, about theneed for progress to made on the issues of theLoughrea nursing home and promised hospitalfor Tuam.

Mr. Gormley: When the previous legislation onthis matter was introduced, it ended in a debacle.


At the time, we warned the Tanaiste that thelegislation was unconstitutional and infringedpeople’s property rights but she took no heed andploughed on regardless. The previous legislationsimply legalised theft. We were stealing from themost vulnerable in society. Following the recentSupreme Court decision, the Tanaiste sought tospread the blame to others. She talked about mal-administration, which not just implicates formerMinisters in the 11 previous Governments butalso senior civil servants.

I hope the Travers report will focus on thewarning given to the Government in 2001, whichit failed to heed, and the 80-page legal documentsubmitted by the health board in 2003, which theGovernment also ignored. We need to know whatthe former Minister for Health and Children,Deputy Martin, knew at the time and what otherMinisters knew. It is not simply a case of pointinga finger at the Tanaiste; we are clearly pointing afinger at this Administration.

The previous speaker referred to home-basedsubvention, which is an important issue becausethe solution should not be based on nursinghomes. We must examine this matter. Constitu-ents have told me that they are prepared to lookafter their elderly parents who have been inhospital for up to six weeks, taking up valuablebeds. We may wonder why we have an accidentand emergency crisis but here is a solution. I amglad to see the Minister of State, Deputy TimO’Malley, nodding in agreement. We need toexamine this matter thoroughly and give that sub-vention to those prepared to avail of it. We wouldsave a great deal of money, free up many bedsand have a much better health service if thatwere done.

I agree with the Government backbencher,Deputy Nolan, who quite rightly said we need toincrease the income limits. We all know of manydeserving cases. I am glad such people are nolonger afraid to visit their doctors but I am surethey are afraid that when the doctor makes adiagnosis, be it an ulcer or other complaint, theywill have to fork out a great deal of money. Apatient with an ulcer, for example, may have topay \100 per month for medication. How cansomeone on a low income afford to pay that?That they must pay out such amounts will causeeven more stress, which will exacerbate theirillness.

The doctor-only medical card represents amiserly half-measure. It does not fulfil the prom-ise made by the Government at the last generalelection. Many people will still be afraid to visittheir doctors because, depending on the diag-nosis, they may have to pay a great deal for pre-scribed medication.

We are told that to lead a healthy life, oneshould choose one’s parents carefully and bewealthy. All the indicators show that the lesswell-off have the worst health problems. TheState should examine ways of evening up the sit-uation so that we will have a truly equal society,but it has not happened yet. Under Britain’s

much maligned national health service, one canget an appointment with a doctor and obtainmedication free of charge but it does not happenhere. Such facilities should form a fundamentalpart of primary health care, yet our primaryhealth care strategy is in tatters.

The publication of the Government documentis welcome but its recommendations are notbeing implemented. The Government documentstates that over 90% of illnesses can be dealt withat primary care level and I agree with that. Theidea of primary care is to examine prevention,thus nipping illnesses in the bud. However, giventhe introduction of the “yellow pack” medicalcard, we can see that the Minister does not fullyadopt that approach. We need to examine theroot causes of illness. We know, for example, that80% of cancers are environmentally linked.Therefore, prevention comes down to the basicingredients of our lives, such as clean air andwater.

There have been many scares recently concern-ing radon gas. We need to look at air pollutionand what we are putting into our water supply.Do people have a genetic predisposition to someof the ingredients in drinking water and will theyaffect them adversely? I raised the question ofmicrowave radiation with the Minister of Statetwo days ago on the Adjournment debate. I donot understand the Government’s schizophrenicapproach to health care. On the one hand, itstates that it wants to invest more money inhealth care, and is doing so, but on the other handit is making society more unhealthy by investingmore in roads instead of public transport and bylocating mobile phone masts close to schools.

Next Sunday, in my own constituency, such amast will be put in place at Ardee House,Rathmines, which is close to St. Mary’s School. Itis the first public building so affected under thenew licensing rules. I regret very much that myconstituency colleague, the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell,did not act to prevent this from happening. It isgoing ahead on Sunday. Meanwhile, the UK’sindependent expert group has referred to the pre-cautionary principle and how such masts shouldnot be located close to schools because it wouldraise radiation levels thus adversely affecting chil-dren. How can the Minister of State justify put-ting a mast of that sort near a school? He willwonder later on why it is that people have cancer.I just do not understand the logic.

In his reply, the Minister of State suggestedthat normal planning regulations will apply. Weknow the 2001 planning and development regu-lations exempt such developments from the nor-mal planning process. Therefore, neither thepublic nor the city council have an input. Thereare no rules so we do not have a proper examin-ation of the pros and cons of this development.That is most regrettable. The reply that is trottedout all the time is that this is normal planning,but it is not normal planning. This matter, whichI have raised a number of times today, is causing


[Mr. Gormley.]me much grief. It should have gone through nor-mal planning. I appeal to the Minister of State,Deputy Tim O’Malley, who is a member of theProgressive Democrats and whose colleague isputting through this measure, to please ensurethe installation of the phone mast on ArdeeHouse in Rathmines is reconsidered.

Mr. Ring: I wish to share time with DeputyCrawford.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Ardagh): Is thatagreed? Agreed.

Mr. Ring: I agree with what Deputy Gormleysaid about cancer. The recent food scare will bethe next big issue to hit the country. I did notrealise people put colouring into food. I alwaysknew people put colouring into their hair butthanks be to God I never did that myself to thebit I have. With respect, that is not relevant tothe Minister of State, Deputy Tim O’Malley.

Mr. T. O’Malley: Deputy Ring is fairly sharp.

Mr. Ring: On a more serious note, this matterwill become a big issue. It is already a big issuein Great Britain and it will also develop here. Ihave been saying for years that the additivesbeing put into food are poisoning us. It is unnatu-ral to see how long bread, milk and other food-stuffs last. It is not right. It is no wonder so manypeople are sick and dying from cancer.

In terms of the Bill, I wish to speak about medi-cal cards and nursing homes. I will not repeatwhat I already said in the House in regard tonursing homes. What happened was a disgraceand should not have happened. I was juniorspokesman on health in 2001 with Deputy GayMitchell when the Ombudsman clarified the rulesand regulations on nursing home care. I raisedthe matter on many occasions. According to theOmbudsman, people were entitled to a State bedas long as they were aged over 70 and had a medi-cal card. I used his ruling on every occasion whenconstituents came to me seeking a full-time bedin a nursing home in County Mayo. When doctorsor health boards tried to put people out ofhospitals I told them they had no right and Iwould take legal action against them if they didso. They never once removed anyone from ahospital because they knew the law and that theywould not win in court. They knew they wereobliged to find a bed for such people. That is afact and it is on the record of the joint committee.

We had a great health board system but theonly people it was good for were the people whoworked for it. Another scandal is coming downthe line in regard to people on pensions. TheMinister of State may not be able to reply on thematter today but I intend to raise on theAdjournment shortly the new ruling by officialsin the ambulance service. A woman from Bal-lycroy recently came to my clinic. She is over 70

years of age and is in very bad health. She neededa hospital appointment in Galway. She lives onabout \165 a week. She could not get the healthboard to provide a service to bring her from Bal-lycroy to Galway, a 150 mile round trip. Shecould not afford a taxi and there was no familyto help out. That is an abuse of the elderly. If theState wants her to stay in her own home to saveit money, it should provide the few necessary ser-vices she needs, including home help and trans-port for her hospital appointments.

Why does the State have to make a big thingabout nothing? I often wonder from where thepeople who make these decisions come. Perhapsthey come from Russia in the bad old days. Theyhave no conscience or understanding of the livesof elderly people. The Department should inves-tigate why elderly people in Mayo whom I rep-resent cannot be brought to badly neededhospital appointments. These people are pre-pared to stay in their own homes.

Reference has been made to home care andhome help. Another issue, which I intend to raisefirst in a private capacity, is in respect of a familywhere an 18 year old is left looking after fourchildren. I thought the State was there to provideservices. I do not understand how the State orsocial workers could allow a young girl of 18years of age to look after four children followingthe recent sudden death of her mother. I aminvestigating the case and intend to bring it to theattention of the health board and the media. It isnot right and should not happen. The family getsone hour of home help every day. We would bebetter off providing home help and back-up forthe family instead of having a social worker mak-ing a report once a week and then going home,which does not deal with the problems.

The courts recently made a decision that ayoung man would be sentenced to 18 monthsimprisonment. That person was advised by a pro-fessional that the best thing he could do at 16years of age would be to pack his bags and go toEngland. It is sad if that is the kind of society inwhich we live. We have gone down the Americanroad which is not a very good road to go down.

I intend asking the party spokesman to tabletwo amendments in regard to medical cards.Health board chief executives always had discre-tion on this matter, and to be fair they used theirdiscretion well. They must be allowed to havediscretion to award a full medical card. If some-body has a medical card on medical grounds theyshould not be told from April on that they arenot entitled to a full medical card, that they willbe entitled to a GP-only medical card.

Yesterday, the Minister of State referred to thefact that local HSE areas will have an appealmechanism. In my local health board area we hadan independent appeal mechanism up to abouttwo years ago. A barrister was employed by thehealth board as an independent assessor. I hadmany a row with him but in all fairness to him,50% of appeals were successful. When he wentinto private practice and up to the Four Courts


his replacement was a health board official whohad worked with every single one of the com-munity welfare officers. It would be impossiblefor such a person to make an independentjudgment against his colleagues. I appeal to theMinister to change that aspect of the Bill. Anindependent person should fill that role, notsomebody who worked for the health board for25 years. Such a person would ring his or her col-leagues to ask about the case and then say it isfine. I do not exaggerate when I say that 80% ofappeals were unsuccessful as opposed to 50%when an independent appeals officer was in place.

I will ask the Fine Gael spokesman to table twoamendments and ensure they are discussed andaccepted. It makes sense that there would be anindependent appeals officer and that peopleawarded medical cards on medical grounds ordue to other circumstances would not just get theyellow pack type of medical card, but a full medi-cal card. I ask the officials to take note of this toensure it is brought to the attention of the Mini-ster. It would be wrong if that happened.

The Minister referred to expanding the guide-lines for medical cards. As they stand, the guide-lines are ridiculous. A single person living alonein receipt of \153 does not qualify for a medicalcard according to the guidelines dated 1 January2005. The threshold for a married couple is \222.If the couple have two dependent children under16 years of age they get an allowance of \31 eachfor them. A family living on \280 or \290 is notentitled to a medical card. Even if one adds25%, it is still not enough.

I welcome any expansion of the entitlementcriteria for medical cards, even GP-only medicalcards. I have met parents who cannot bring theirchildren to the doctor because it costs them \50.A consequent visit to the chemist could cost them\75. If there is a number of children in a house,nine times out of ten, sickness such as flu oranother virus will spread to them all. I have seenmany parents without medical cards who couldnot bring their children to the doctor becausethey could not afford to do so. Every person inthis House knows the guidelines are wrong. Thepeople who adjudicated on the guidelines for thepast 20 years were the chief executives of healthboards. How would they know, no more thansome politicians, because they do not understandhow this affects people? They were on big salariesand did not understand how the system worked.

1 o’clock

I can table a parliamentary question to getinformation but I am sure the officials will haveit. If one looks back over the past ten years at

how the guidelines on income wereincreased, one will see that they didnot even keep pace with inflation,

which was low in recent years. It was wrong butit happened. They targeted the most vulnerablein society and took away their medical cards. Thistime next year when we return to the House, wewill find that fewer people have medical cardsthan at present. With the minimum wage continu-

ally increasing, more people will fall outside theguidelines.

It is important to ensure community welfareofficers or superintendents have the right ofappeal and the right to grant full medical cards.I appeal to the Tanaiste and her Department toexamine the proposal for an independent personto hear appeals rather than someone who workedfor a health board for 20 years.

Mr. Crawford: I thank Deputy Ring for sharingtime. Like other Deputies, I question why noexplanatory memorandum was included with thisimportant Bill. The previous Bill was rushedthrough the House without proper consultationand we are all aware of what happened. I paytribute to the President because she saw sense inthe issues we raised. I was one of those whoraised questions about the Bill’s legality at thetime and we were proved correct, for which I amthankful. I also thank my colleague, DeputyPerry, and our party leader, Deputy Kenny, forraising the issue of the illegal charging of nursinghome residents.

The Minister of State at the Department ofHealth and Children, Deputy Tim O’Malley, whois in the House, along with his colleagues, DeputyCallely and the former Minister for Health andChildren, Deputy Martin, were all present at themeeting in 2003 when this issue was discussed andyet nothing was done about it. This issue isextremely serious and it seems to have beenignored. If it had not been for the tenacity of ourparty leader, Deputy Kenny, in continuing toraise the matter in this House on a weekly basis,I am not sure it would have ever seen the lightof day.

The Minister of State at the Department ofHealth and Children, Deputy Sean Power, statedyesterday that this Bill is intended to establish asound legal basis for the policy to charge resi-dents a contribution towards their shelter andmaintenance in long-term institutions. That maybe possible. I hope for everyone’s sake that thelegal position is correct. However, I am worriedabout the lack of information available regardinghow the means test will be applied to thoserequiring subvention in private nursing homesbecause of the shortage of places in State runnursing homes.

For example, at the time of the last election,254 people in Cavan-Monaghan were in receiptof subvention but when the election was over, aneffort was made to reduce this number to 150 or170. Eventually, we achieved agreement on 214and, thankfully, we have now achieved a level of234 people in receipt of subvention. The traumawhich many families have to endure in order toget this subvention is unreal. On Tuesday I satwith an aged man who is in respite care in St.Mary’s nursing home but is being turfed outbecause there is no room for him. Although heowns his own house, he has had great difficultyfinding ways and means of support. This man hadpaid his way all his life and this is a traumatic


[Mr. Crawford.]situation for a man without a single familymember closer than second or third cousin, withwhom to discuss the issue. We must have a morecaring and realistic approach.

The trauma endured by a patient fromMonaghan in a west of Ireland nursing home inorder to receive subvention was nothing ordinary.Furthermore, the subvention was not even paidfrom the time of the patient’s arrival. The person-nel in charge of the nursing home stated they hadnever come across the like of it before. There isa major difference in how the elderly are treatedin different areas and I hope that under the newhealth structure this issue will be sorted out onceand for all. Every patient, no matter where he orshe lives, should have similar access to accommo-dation and receive similar treatment.

Before the laws changed in Northern Irelandin the early 1990s, many people from Cavan andMonaghan were sent across the Border becausethey could receive full care there for free. More-over, the health boards encouraged this practice.This leaves the constituency with a seemingly lowbase from which to judge the situation. However,we must remember that the former NorthEastern Health Board area has experienced thesingle biggest increase in population anywhere inthe nation and the numbers of people over 85years are also increasing. Therefore, we have abigger problem than anywhere else, which cannotbe ignored.

I am dealing with the case of an elderly manwho received legal advice from a solicitor that heshould retain 20 acres of his small farm holding.However, the man’s son needs every inch of thefarm in order to make a living without having topay his father. This is accepted and acknowledgedbut the father is in a nursing home and the familymust pay \350 per week along with the man’spension in order to keep him there. The familyhas only in recent weeks received a small subven-tion but the situation is crazy because the man’swife is still alive. Does she have no rights? It isimpossible to understand.

In another case, a mother in a nursing homehad owned her own house and when she marriedher husband bought all the land around it. Theirson is now the only person living in the houseand he farms the land. The house is being usedas collateral as far as the health board is con-cerned. This must be examined. I am pleased withthe Tanaiste’s comment this morning that therepayments of money to those who are entitled toit will be simplified and dealt with without legalcomplications. It is a serious problem because itwill be a complicated process but I accept theTanaiste’s commitment and hope it works.

This Bill provides that 80% of patient’s pen-sions must be paid for maintenance and so on,which will leave \30 or \35 depending on the pen-sion. However, there must be some flexibility inthis regard. I would not like to see the situationin which a relatively fit person who enjoys takinga drink or a cigarette or having his or her hair

done would be tied to such an amount. If the per-son wants to buy birthday presents for grand-children, \35 will not go very far. I want to seethat situation made reasonable and respectable.

More than 100,000 medical cards have beenremoved from the system because of the failureto increase the limit for the means test. This issuehas already been addressed by many Deputies onboth sides of the House. However, I have a majorquestion to ask about how eligibility is evaluatedin different areas. From January 1997 to Sep-tember 2004, County Cavan lost 3,630 out of22,000 medical cards, County Monaghan lost6,000 out of 22,000 and the four former NorthEastern Health Board counties together lost28,000 out of 113,000 medical cards. However, inCounty Cork, the home of the former Ministerfor Health and Children, Deputy Martin, out of139,000 cards available in January 1997, only8,097 were removed by September 2004. Onemust ask how this came about and why there wassuch a difference. This difference is more than20,000 when one takes everything into account.There is talk about 300,000 new medical cardsbeing issued, but we have already lost 100,000.Where are we going? Reference has also beenmade to 200,000 new doctor-only cards. My col-league, Deputy Twomey, proposed such cards asa means of dealing with the problem. As amember of the British-Irish InterparliamentaryBody, I had the privilege of touring a number ofhospitals in Wick in the north of Scotland, Walesand other places. It was clear that where proper,free primary care was available it removed enor-mous pressure from the accident and emergencyservices. That area of services must be improveddramatically but the Minister’s proposal does notgo far enough.

The Tanaiste said that the traditional medicalcard would continue to be held by 85% of medi-cal card holders. Does that mean that some of the200,000 doctor-only cards will replace the medicalcards or will there be 200,000 doctor-only cardsas well as 30,000 extra medical cards? That mustbe clarified. The 200,000 doctor-only cards, the30,000 extra medical cards and the existing100,000 medical cards must remain in place toensure people have proper access to primary care.It will remove many of them from the accidentand emergency departments and alleviate muchof the pressure.

I am grateful that Monaghan General Hospitalis back on call for medical purposes. However,the Minister should ensure that something is doneabout the surgical service.

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. T. O’Malley): I thank Deputiesfor their contributions to this debate. TheGovernment brought forward this Bill to estab-lish a sound legal basis for the policy of requiringsome contribution towards shelter and mainten-ance of people with full eligibility in long-termstay institutions. The Supreme Court has con-firmed that it is constitutionally sound for the


Oireachtas to legislate for this policy. The issue isbeing put beyond legal doubt after nearly 29years.

The other matter addressed in the Bill, theintroduction of a doctor visit medical card, is amajor step forward in ensuring that people on lowincomes have access to general practitioner ser-vices and advice. The Health Service Executive,as the body established to administer the healthservices on a national basis, will be in a positionto commence the introduction of these cards assoon as the Bill has been enacted.

It is a long-standing feature of our system, andone which has been policy under Governments ofall the major parties over the past 30 years, thatmost people in publicly funded long-term careshould make some contribution to the cost of thiscare. Quality care is expensive and, even with acontribution from those receiving this care, thebulk of the cost of providing a high standard ofquality care must be borne by the Exchequer.The charges to be imposed on those in publicnursing homes under the provisions of this Billrepresent approximately 10% of the overall costof care.

The income foregone by the Health ServiceExecutive for as long as these charges cannot beraised is estimated in the region of \2 million perweek. A statutory framework that puts the long-standing policy on a sound legal footing and safe-guards the income generated from this source isvital. The provisions of the Health (Amendment)Bill 2005 will secure this source of income, whichhas been an essential element of the funding ofour health services in the past and must remainso in the future.

The introduction of a doctor visit medical cardis the most efficient way to help a significantadditional number of people to access primarycare. It is in line with the commitment containedin the health strategy to ensure that the allocationof medical cards is on the basis of prioritisinggroups most in need of those services and isintended to benefit approximately 200,000people.

I will take this opportunity to respond to someof the points made by speakers during the debate.With regard to the provision in the Bill referringto 80% of the maximum old age non-contributorypension, it must be remembered that this is themaximum weekly charge that can be levied. Ifthis is taken together with the provision in theBill to allow the Health Service Executive toreduce or waive the charge imposed on a personto avoid undue financial hardship, 80% of themaximum non-contributory old age pension is areasonable upper limit to set for the charge.

A number of Deputies expressed concern thatthe percentage of the population covered by amedical card has declined over recent years.However, they neglected to mention that this isattributable in large measure to the economicsuccess we have enjoyed, which has reducedmany people’s need for State support to meethealth care and other living costs.

Furthermore, the Government’s objective is toensure that people most in need can have a medi-cal card rather than simply to achieve coverageof a certain percentage of the population or toissue a specific number of medical cards. It is togive effect to this targeted approach, and manyDeputies in the past have sought such a targetedapproach, that, at the request of the Tanaiste,changes to the income guidelines have recentlybeen introduced by the Health Service Executiveand are intended to ensure that an additional30,000 medical cards can be issued in the currentyear. This is in addition to the doctor visit cardswhich will be introduced subsequent to the pass-age of this Bill.

There is no question of the Government seek-ing over time to reduce the number of standardmedical cards in favour of issuing increasednumbers of doctor visit cards. Several Deputieswere worried about this. This initiative isintended to complement the existing medical cardarrangements which have been in force formany years.

The Department of Health and Children hasrecently written to the interim chief officer of theHealth Service Executive to indicate formallythat the Government’s objective in bringing for-ward this initiative was to enable approximately200,000 medical cards to be issued in respect ofgeneral practitioner services and that theTanaiste wishes to have the necessary administra-tive arrangements in place to enable the newcards to be issued from April. Deputy Twomeyand other speakers welcomed the introduction ofthe doctor visit cards. It has also been welcomedby many groups in the community. It is recog-nised that for many people, particularly mothersof small children, visits to the doctor were a prob-lem. This applied to people whose incomes arejust above the medical card threshold. They wereafraid to visit the doctor because of the costinvolved. That will no longer arise because withthe doctor visit cards they will be able to visit thedoctor free of charge.

The Health Service Executive has beenrequested to have the necessary preparatory stepstaken and operational guidelines developed suchas will enable applications for doctor visit medicalcards to be accepted as soon as possible after theenactment of the relevant legislation and thecards subsequently issued to persons who meetthe relevant criteria. With the establishment ofthe Health Service Executive, the administrativearrangements for this card will be operated on astandardised basis throughout the country.

While the Health Service Executive intendsinitially to set the income threshold for the doctorvisit cards at 25% higher than applies for thestandard medical card, this threshold will, ifnecessary, be reviewed in light of experience toensure the desired number of cards are issued tothose intended to benefit under the scheme.Therefore, if there are not sufficient applicationsfor the cards, the thresholds will be raised untilthe level of 200,000 cards is reached.


[Mr. T. O’Malley.]The Bill will bring clarity to the issue of charges

for long-stay care where it is clear there has notbeen a sound basis for the practice going backnearly 30 years. The legislation will also ensurethe income flow from charges imposed to date issecured and that it will continue to support theprovision of quality services for those in long-term care. I am pleased to note that none of themajor parties has registered any difficulty withthe principle involved here. The introduction of adoctor visit medical card is a supplementaryinitiative which will enable 200,000 people fromlower income households to attend a doctor freeof charge. This will help to overcome barriers toassessing GP services for many individuals andfamilies who are above the standard medical cardincome guidelines.

Many Opposition Members referred to theimminent Travers report. I do not wish to com-ment on the report because it will not be releasedfor a few days and I have not seen it. Obviously,there will be further debate in the House on thereport. As one of the Ministers who attended acertain meeting, I presumed legal advice wouldbe obtained and this is what I told anyone whoasked me about the matter.

Mr. Neville: Did the Minister of State informthe senior Minister of what happened?

Acting Chairman: Deputy, this is not a ques-tion and answer session.

Mr. T. O’Malley: As I stated, there will be adebate in the House.

The Dail divided: Ta, 67; Nıl, 35.

Ta

Ahern, Noel.Ardagh, Sean.Blaney, Niall.Brady, Martin.Breen, James.Brennan, Seamus.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Connolly, Paudge.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.de Valera, Sıle.Dempsey, Tony.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Finneran, Michael.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Sean.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Sean.

Mr. Neville: It is a simple question. Did theMinister of State inform the senior Minister ofwhat happened when the Minister of State wasoutside the door?

Mr. T. O’Malley: I am not aware who wasinside or outside the door.

Mr. Neville: The Minister of State, Deputy TimO’Malley, and the Minister of State, DeputyCallely, as the Tanaiste stated-——

Mr. T. O’Malley: The Deputy may not haveheard what I said. I am sure there will be a debateon the Travers report in this House.

Mr. Neville: The Minister of State shouldanswer “yes” or “no”.

Mr. T. O’Malley: I was never asked to informanybody.

Mr. Neville: Surely, with such animportant——

Mr. T. O’Malley: The Deputy asked me a ques-tion. Will he wait for the reply? If he read theminutes of the meeting, he would know that therecommendation of the meeting was that legaladvice would be sought in regard to the question.It was my presumption that this would be done.That is all I wish to state on the matter.

Mr. Neville: The Minister of State did notinform the Minister.

Question put.

Hoctor, Maire.Jacob, Joe.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Kirk, Seamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.McDowell, Michael.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.McHugh, Paddy.Martin, Micheal.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M. J.O Cuıv, Eamon.O’Connor, Charlie.O’Donnell, Liz.O’Donoghue, John.O’Flynn, Noel.O’Keeffe, Batt.O’Keeffe, Ned.O’Malley, Fiona.O’Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Sean.Roche, Dick.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.

49 Driver Testing and Standards Authority 3 March 2005. Bill 2004: Second Stage (Resumed) 50

Ta—continued

Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Walsh, Joe.

Nıl

Boyle, Dan.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Burton, Joan.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Cuffe, Ciaran.Deasy, John.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Harkin, Marian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Joe.Howlin, Brendan.Lynch, Kathleen.McCormack, Padraic.McGrath, Finian.

Tellers: Ta, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher; Nıl, Deputies Neville and Boyle.

Question declared carried.

Driver Testing and Standards Authority Bill2004: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: “That the Bill benow read a Second Time.”

Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen): As I haveonly three minutes left to contribute to thisdebate, I will not have an opportunity to read theremainder of the speech I commenced on 14October last, a copy of which I have again circu-lated to Deputies. The remainder of my speechdeals largely with a summary of sections 10 to 35of the Bill. I see the establishment of the DriverTesting and Standards Authority as a crucial stepin improving the delivery of the driver testing ser-vice in the face of a continuing and unpre-cedented high level of demand for the service.

The authority will be established outside nor-mal Civil Service structures and should be in aposition to deliver a more focused and flexibleservice that will be able to respond more readilyto customer needs and future demand. In thelight of the authority’s particular duty to raisedriving standards, I envisage such a body havingthe necessary flexibility to take an innovativeapproach to driving standards that will have long-term benefits for road safety in future. Such bene-fits will not be as immediate as those resultingfrom the targeting of the offences of speeding,seat belt wearing and drink driving but it isimportant that we foster the development of driv-ing standards to underpin the overall strategy forroad safety.

The establishment of a separate public sectorbody to deliver the driver testing service and takeresponsibility for other functions relating to thetesting and control of drivers, driving instructors

Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Neville, Dan.O’Shea, Brian.O’Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Sean.Sargent, Trevor.Shortall, Roisın.Upton, Mary.

and vehicles that would be more appropriate toan executive agency than to a Department is alsoan opportunity for other functions relating toroad safety in general to be assigned to the auth-ority. Those that may be assigned to it will ensurethat the authority will play an important part inimproving road safety in general. In this contextI am considering what additional functions mightbe assigned to the authority in the long term toenable it to fulfil its role more effectively. As partof this process, I propose to bring forward appro-priate amendments on Committee Stage.

The process of recruiting a chief executiveofficer for the DTSA is at an advanced stage andI expect the post to be filled at an early date.It will be based in Ballina and will be at a levelequivalent to the assistant secretary grade in theCivil Service. I commend the Bill to the House.

Ms O. Mitchell: I welcome the opportunity torespond to the Minister’s contribution. Before Itook up this brief, the significant waiting lists fordriver testing defied explanation. I still wonder inthis economy of limitless resources and capabili-ties and technological prowess why the Govern-ment cannot organise something as fundamentaland simple as a driving test. I acknowledge theproblem did not arise during the tenure of thisGovernment. I vaguely recall an amnesty intro-duced by a former colleague of mine 30 years ago.However, this problem was foreseeable and therehas been no excuse in recent years for the waitinglists given that it was recognised that the problemwould get worse. Our GDP has increased and carsales since the mid-1990s have increased. Ourdemographics should have acted as an earlywarning system to highlight the demand for driv-ing tests and to acknowledge that waiting listswould expand unless something was done to easethe problem.


[Ms O. Mitchell.]One can hold a driving licence at 17 years. The

State, therefore, has 17 years notice that peoplewill require driving licences. The demographicsshould give the Government the opportunity toorganise this simple process, given that it does notinvolve rocket science. Resources have neverbeen a problem. While driver testing is notentirely self-financing, a few adjustments couldmake it self-financing. It is difficult to work outwhat has been the problem.

I welcome the introduction of the legislationbecause that, in itself, acknowledges there is aproblem but, unfortunately, it does not containproposals to resolve it. Responsibility will begiven to a new body to address the issues but thatis as far as it goes. The legislation implicitlyacknowledges that what went before failed andthat a single focused agency whose primary func-tion is to deliver a driver testing system and issuecertificates of competency could potentially do abetter job.

I am a little sceptical because this will be thethird home of the driver testing system in as manyyears. It languished for years in the Departmentof the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern-ment before being hived off to the Departmentof Transport where it was expected to get moreattention. The system has only been under theDepartment’s aegis for two years but it is beingreborn under a new arm’s length agency. I cannothelp feeling that, similar to the health service,new structures are assumed to equate withreform.

I broadly subscribe to the Bill’s objectives,which are to deliver a driver testing system and topromote and develop an improvement in drivingstandards, which is urgently required. Nobodywill deny driving standards in Ireland are absol-utely woeful. However, I am perplexed and scep-tical because the legislation does not outline howan improvement will be made. The new body’sbrief is vague and open-ended and I do not knowhow it will do better than what went before. Howwill waiting times and the numbers of untesteddrivers be reduced?

Approximately, 117,000 applicants are waitingfor a driving test while 367,000 people are drivingwith a provisional licence. How will that beaddressed so that these drivers can take a test andbe issued with a certificate of competency? It isan absolute outrage that 367,000, a significantproportion of the population, are driving withouta qualification, some illegally.

The Minister stated there was no evidence tosuggest drivers who had failed the test were lesscompetent than fully licensed drivers. Perhaps heis correct because such evidence is not even col-lected. We do not know when road accidents andfatalities occur whether the victims were drivingwith provisional licences or had done the test andfailed it. Such information is not available.However, this gives the completely wrong signalabout road safety and it undermines everybody’srespect for the law.

Every day in the House we pass legislationdesigned to further control, limit and manipulatebehaviour and we intrude into ever more obscureareas of human activity through various fines,rules, regulations and penalties to regulate behav-iour. However, while regulation of driving behav-iour is the norm worldwide, the Government hasmade it impossible for people to comply with thelaw. When they do a test and fail, they may con-tinue to drive indefinitely. That sends the wrongsignal to the population.

How will the legislation change this? Will achange in structure be confused with a change inthe system? Structural change was undertaken byhealth boards and local authorities, but it is nevera solution on its own and it hides the lack of sol-utions. For instance, the establishment of a trafficcorps was announced with great fanfare prior toChristmas. The people in the corps are doing thesame work they always did and nothing haschanged. No budget, strategy or plan has beenput in place.

This is a large Bill, given that its aspirations areextremely modest, as it comprises 37 sections. Itprovides for all eventualities. The new authoritycan be given a wide range of additional functionsby the Minister. It is enabled by powers conferredon it to engage in a wide range of activities inpursuit of its specific and general objectives,according to the explanatory memorandum. Theauthority’s remit is potentially so wide and vaguethat nobody involved in the drafting of the legis-lation had the slightest idea how it will undertakeits duties and effect an improvement. The auth-ority is an all-singing, all-dancing body empow-ered to do virtually everything. It can buy andhive off resources, borrow, outsource and set upsubsidiaries. While these powers are worthy, theyreflect a lack of understanding of what the auth-ority should do. The range of possible solutionsoften masks the absence of a solution.

The appalling waiting lists, which have been inexistence for years, are a national joke. The auth-ority’s first task should be to address the backlogof applicants for driving tests and then introducea system to prevent the recurrence of backlogs.Perhaps it is a simplistic approach but that canonly happen if more testers are appointed. Willmore testers be recruited? How will theirappointments be funded, given that no allocationwas provided for the authority in the budget?How will the individuals be trained and tested?What qualifications will they require?

One of the new authority’s tasks is to agree ser-vice agreements and standards of performancewith the Minister. What benchmark will be used?According to the Minister’s reply to a recentparliamentary question, the number of drivertesters has remained the same since 2001, atapproximately 120. However, the number on con-tract has increased. Is it significant in light of theMinister’s intentions for the new authority thattesting itself should be outsourced? It is hard tosee how they might do a worse job than currently.I would like to know about that. I have raised


concerns about the privatisation of aspects of thejustice area. When something is connected withenforcing the law, one needs specific safeguardsbefore one allows it to be privatised. It is amongthe matters to which I seek responses before thisBill is passed into law. Those are the kinds of fun-damental questions that we need answered.

It is simply not acceptable to force onto longand expensive waiting lists people who want to sita test. I saw a figure that the profits of insurancecompanies were up by approximately \4 millionto \5 million annually as a result of chargingpeople who had not got a full driving licencebecause they awaited a test. No one expectspeople to be able to ring up and get a test tomor-row, but there must be a reasonable timeframeand a guarantee that, once one has applied for atest, one will be given one within a given period,be it a week, ten days or even a month. In somecases it is over a year and it has been even longer.That is unacceptable.

Quite apart from people waiting, what I alsofind unacceptable and a glaring omission is theabsence of a penalty for failing one’s test. If thepurpose of testing is to establish that a person isa competent driver and someone persistentlyfails, it is a reasonable conclusion that he or sheis not competent. After all, the certificate onereceives when one fails says that one is not com-petent and has not passed. If one passes, onereceives a competency test certificate, and if onefails, an incompetency certificate. Despite this, welet those who have failed their test straight outonto the roads again with no penalty. We let themin charge of a potentially lethal weapon.

Why are they allowed out again? Why arethere no consequences other than perhapsslightly higher insurance premia? Even those arereduced over the years if one does not have anaccident. There is no incentive even to try to passthe test. I realise it is not like that for the majorityof people who want to pass their tests quickly andget on with their lives. However, some people donot give a hoot, and why should they? That mustchange. At the very least, there should be an obli-gation to take lessons from validly qualified andrecognised instructors. That is another story thatneeds to be regulated and examined, and I willreturn to it.

The number of tests that people may sit shouldbe regulated. I am not saying that people shouldnot be allowed sit their driving test three times,but to go on doing so and make a lifetime’s workof it is utterly ridiculous. They should be limitedin where and how they can drive. They shouldnot be allowed on motorways or to drive fasterthan 30 mph. After a certain number of failures,there is no doubt that the fee should be increased.Why should we continue to allow such peoplecreate backlogs and clog up the list? There mustbe some cut-off point. That may seem harsh, andI accept that, but this is about road safety andthey are putting other people’s lives at risk. Thereare others to consider. If one has consistently pro-ven oneself to be incompetent, it is reasonable to

say at some point that enough is enough and thatone may not drive on the road.

I know a small group of people exists whocannot sit tests because they apparently get verynervous about sitting exams and so on. Perhapsan alternative test might be devised for them. Iam sure it is not beyond human ingenuity todevise such a test for someone who genuinelysays that he or she gets very nervous. I am surethat such cases are particularly obvious to testers.However, that does not detract from the principlethat there must be a penalty. If one fails consist-ently, one should eventually be put off the road.Otherwise, the purpose of the test is negated andit makes no sense to have one.

I also heard the Minister say that the backlogof driving tests was partly due to people not both-ering to turn up. That is related. Why would onebother turning up? Why would one bother can-celling? There is no real incentive or penalty.What is another year on the driving testing listand the provisional licence? If the State does notrespect the requirement that one have a drivinglicence, why should the public? The unacceptableconsequence of this rule is that, to add to theproblem, a person must resit the test each yearafter the first two-year provisional licence. Theperpetual failures constantly add to the numberswho fail each year. I understand that, incredibly,there are 1,300 each week, accounting for almost50% of all tests. I do not know if many of themare repeat tests since that figure is not available.However, if there is a failure rate of almost47%, something is seriously wrong with the test.

As I say, I do not know how many are habitualfailures adding to the backlog, but large numbersare added to it each week. They will stay in thesystem as long as they are allowed and there areno consequences for them, although there shouldbe. The system must be graduated since oneshould not bring down the guillotine straightaway. However, they must know that, ultimately,if they do not perform, they will be put off theroad.

It is self-evident that we must have moretesters. Equally important is the quality of thetraining and education of people on the road. Wehave introduced the theory test, and my FineGael colleague, Deputy Naughten, has developeda policy programme on how better training andtesting might be introduced, something I recom-mend to the Minister since a great deal of soundwork has gone into that. I do not want to go intothe details of it now, but if 50% of applicants fail,either the test or the preparation for it is wrong.Probably it is a combination of the two.

The test itself must be updated and modernisedto be more applicable to contemporary drivingconditions. In many cases, conditions on the road— certainly, since I did my own test — havechanged. There are now road conditions and mar-kings that simply did not exist then. We now havemotorways, and I am not even sure that we hadroundabouts when I sat my test. I believe thatthere was one dual carriageway in the country.


[Ms O. Mitchell.]Those are all new conditions that are not part ofthe training or testing.

Mr. Cullen: As a matter of interest, the Deputyis right about the high failure rate, but it is inline with the average in every other country. Theproblem is not a uniquely Irish phenomenon,although I am not excusing it.

Ms O. Mitchell: Perhaps what is unique is thefact that we let them back on the list.

Ms Shortall: And on the road.

Ms O. Mitchell: That is what I mean. There areno consequences. That is the real objection. I donot object to their sitting the test, rather that, byvirtue of the certificate we give them, they rep-resent a danger to everyone else.

Experiences such as night-time journeys, emer-gency braking and so on are not part of the test,yet they are part of everyday driving and shouldinform both training and testing. The preparationfor the test is a vast, uncharted landscape. I knowwe have all had communications from instructors.However, the truth is that anyone can set up asan instructor at the moment. Bizarrely, one neednot even have a full driving licence to set oneselfup as a driving instructor. It is mad that someonewith a provisional driving licence, who may havefailed the test several times, can do that.

At the behest of the Department some yearsago, a voluntary register of driving instructors wasset up by the industry which required a minimumlevel and standard of performance. The industryhas itself gone to considerable trouble andexpense to clean up its act. Will the Ministerensure that the authority capitalises on what workhas been done by the existing instructors who setup that register in addition to the extra standardsthat the authority may require to be observed bydriving instructors? Obviously, it is not compre-hensive but it is a beginning and we must recog-nise the efforts of those driving instructors whotake an interest in the industry and are in it forthe long haul rather than the fly-by-nightoperators.

2 o’clock

I want to refer to the danger of motorcycles,about which I feel strongly. Every mother feelsstrongly about the number of deaths from motor-

cycle accidents, and I am sure we allthink, “There, but for the grace ofGod, go I”. The number of deaths

from motorcycle accidents is unacceptable. Theroad safety strategy up to 2004 promised to intro-duce mandatory training for motorcyclists priorto their being allowed on the road, but that didnot happen. I understand it is in the new strategy,but mandatory training is still not in place. I stressthe importance of that training. I have no doubtthat the number of deaths from motorcycle acci-dents is largely due to poor training or, in manycases, no training, which is in turn compounded

by poor testing. The problem of poor training andpoor testing must be tackled.

Many motorcyclists are young drivers. Theyregard a motorcycle as a cheap alternative to acar. Young people are attracted to speed and theease of transport a motorcycle appears to offer.That is the reason the testing and training mustbe rigorous. This problem must be tackled. It willrequire additional resources. The testing alone —I am sure the Minister is familiar with the prob-lem — involves a different set of skills from thoseneeded for car driving and testing, but there isnothing in the budget to indicate that somethingwill be done immediately in this area. There isno escaping the urgency of this matter and theunacceptable number of deaths.

Every weekend we hear of another young ladkilled in a motorcycle accident. The figures up tolast weekend indicate that 69 people were killedon our roads this year, 32 of whom were car driv-ers and ten motorcyclists. In two months, tenmotorcyclists were killed. This appears to be anuninsurable activity, which is unfortunate becausethe many enthusiasts involved in motorcyclingare extremely good drivers who do special train-ing, abroad in many cases. This activity attractspeople who have an interest in the sport and whoare very skilful drivers, but they are being penal-ised because there is not a proper system in placeto ensure the necessary skills are made availableto young people and that they are testedthoroughly. We must stop reckless young mendriving on our roads who are a danger to them-selves and others because of a failure to inculcatein them the seriousness of what they are doingwhen they take a motorcycle on to the road.

I would like to think this measure will make adifference to road safety but the proposal is sovague and open to interpretation and so market-oriented that it is impossible for me to predicthow this authority will operate or what it will tryto achieve. I support market freedom in all cir-cumstances but when it comes to road safety andenforcing the licensing system, an area inextri-cably linked with the justice system, it is not anarea for unbridled commercialism of the kind thatappears to be permitted in the Bill.

It would be wrong if the testing system struc-tures were to be administered or arranged in sucha way as to be influenced by revenue raising cir-cumstances. We discussed this issue previously inthe context of speed cameras but for the systemto have credibility and the confidence of thepublic, it must be transparent and have nothingto do with potential profit for an outside body.That is very important. I do not know if that iswhat is envisaged but it is permitted under theBill. Revenue raising considerations should notsupersede the purpose of the legislation.

Whether the legislation will work remains to beseen but what is certain is that another quango isbeing set up, apparently at arm’s length from theMinister and, therefore, from the Dail. This bodywill not be answerable to the Dail through theMinister. Questions are tabled to the Minister


every day about the driver testing system and heanswers those questions. Will the Minister answersuch questions in future or will we be told theyare matters for the new body which will contactus in the fullness of time? That would not beacceptable. The fact that so many questions aretabled is a reflection of the inadequacy of thesystem but at least the Minister of the day isaccountable for this body and must explain whythe system does not work and respond to all quer-ies. That accountability cannot be taken away.Too much accountability to this House has beengiven away. I support this legislation but I ask theMinister to give a guarantee that he will remainaccountable to the Dail for the activities of thisnew body.

Ms Shortall: I welcome the Bill. It arises as aresult of a review carried out by the Comptrollerand Auditor General of the mess that has becomethe driver testing system. The review recom-mended that the area of driver testing should beestablished under a public sector agency. Thatmakes some sense but I share the concerns ofDeputy Olivia Mitchell that this initiative may beused by the Minister as an attempt to hive off hisresponsibility in terms of setting policy in thedriver testing and licensing area and accountingto the Dail for what is happening in that area. Ihope that under the terms of this legislation thenew agency will be accountable to the Ministerand that the Minister, in turn, will be accountableto the Dail for the performance of that agency. Ifthat is not provided for clearly in the legislation,we will seek to amend it to provide for thatbecause it is a critical aspect of the road safetyplan and it is not acceptable for the Minister toattempt to off-load his responsibility to a separateagency. We have seen that happen in regard tomany aspects of public life where different agen-cies and quangos were set up and the Ministerconcerned could keep them at arm’s length andnot be accountable to the Dail for performancein that area.

This initiative is long overdue and has beenpromised for many years. In 2002, the Taoiseachwas asked about it on the Order of Business andhe promised that the legislation would be avail-able in mid-2003. It was not until July 2004 thatthe Bill was published and now, in March 2005,we are debating Second Stage. It is clear therehas been considerable slippage in terms of under-takings given in the area of driver testing. That isas a result of a lack of priority given to this areaby the Minister and his predecessor.

The issue of driver testing and licensing is fun-damentally about road safety. When we considerwhat has happened in regard to road safety inrecent years, following the initial positive effectsof the penalty points system, we see now thatroad deaths and serious accidents are againincreasing significantly. That indicates a failureon the part of the Government to give adequateattention to the issue of road safety.

The road safety strategy was published in late2004, over a year late. It replaces the 1998-2002strategy but throughout 2003 and for most of2004, a current road safety strategy was not inplace. It appears the previous Minister, DeputyBrennan, was too busy meddling in semi-Statecompanies and issuing meaningless press state-ments to give attention to this area, and we havehad to deal with the consequences of that neglect.The number of deaths and serious injuries causedon our roads continues to rise and no seriousinitiative has been taken in the past two years totackle that problem.

Unfortunately and inexplicably, the review ofthe road strategy 1998-2002 did not consider theimpact of inexperienced and unlicensed driverson road accident figures. That is extraordinaryand I wonder if it was because it might have beentoo embarrassing for the Minister or his prede-cessor to tackle this problem. No serious workappears to have been done in preparation for thecurrent road safety strategy, particularly in termsof reviewing its predecessor.

As regards speeding, the review of the previousroad safety strategy shows that an initial targetwas set in terms of reducing the incidence ofexcessive speeding by 50%. That seems a reason-able target. It is regrettable, however, that duringthe course of the strategy, it was refined andbecame an objective merely to reduce thenumber of vehicles exceeding the 60 mph speedlimit on single carriageway roads from 51% to40%. In my view it was pathetic to aim to have asituation where only 40% of drivers wereexceeding the limit to which I refer. It was,however, indicative of the extent to which peoplecompletely disregard road safety legislation andspeed limits. It also provided evidence of thescale of the turnaround that needs to be achievedin terms of road safety. In that context, it isunacceptable and unforgivable that the Ministerand his predecessor have paid so little attentionto the area of road safety.

The fact that the Second Stage debate on thislegislation commenced last October and that weare only returning to it today is again indicativeof the lack of priority the Minister is giving to thisarea. In October, the Minister suggested, incred-ibly, that there is no correlation betweenunlicensed drivers and road accidents. One won-ders on what planet he lives. I accept that datarelating to this matter do not exist. Questionsmust be asked as to why this is the case and whythis area has not been examined. The Minister’sstatement that there is no correlation becausethere are no data is meaningless. It stands toreason that if there are large numbers of inexperi-enced and unlicensed people driving on ourroads, they will contribute to the accident rate.Any attempt by the Minister to negate that corre-lation is disingenuous. There is no basis, otherthan the fact that these specific data are not col-lected by any agency, for the Minister to makesuch a contention. Inexperienced drivers, partic-ularly those who have failed their driving tests,


[Ms Shortall.]represent a hazard on the road and are muchmore likely than others to be involved inaccidents.

I discovered some interesting data whichappears to deny the contention the Minister madein October. The National Safety Council pro-duced data in 2003 which seem to indicate thatthere is a relationship between unlicensed or pro-visionally licensed drivers and road accidentrates. The council found that 66% of accidentsinvolving fatal and serious injury are due to driveraction. It also discovered that speed is the singlelargest cause of such accidents. The NSC con-sidered this matter in greater detail and itemerged that 78% of speed related accidents arecaused by people under the age of 34. It is, there-fore, perfectly reasonable and logical to draw theconclusion that a significant number of thosedriving on provisional licences — these peopleare, by their nature, young and inexperienced —fall into the category of people who cause seriousaccidents which result in death or serious injury.If the Minister is determined to deal with the areaof road safety, he must ensure that data relatingto serious accidents and the driving status of thepeople who cause them should be collected eitherby the Garda or the National Safety Council.Action in that regard should be takenimmediately.

The existing driver testing system can only bedescribed as a shambles. There are 380,000 driv-ers on provisional licences. Of these, 178,000 areon their first licence, 107,000 are on their secondlicence and 95,000 are on their third or sub-sequent licence. It is clear, therefore, that morethan half these people — 202,000 — can legallydrive alone. I do not know how the Minister canjustify this. I am not aware of any other countrywhere a person can obtain a provisional licencewhen they turn 17, never drive a car and sub-sequently obtain a second provisional licence andlegally drive alone. We have set a dangerous pre-cedent in terms of people who have had two pro-visional licences and who fail their driving testsbecause these individuals can legally drive alonefor a further two years. That is an intolerable sit-uation and there is no way the Minister can standover it, particularly if he has any interest in thearea of road safety.

This situation has developed because of a com-plete lack of responsibility on the part of theMinister and his predecessors to tackle seriouslythe areas of driving, driver safety and driver test-ing. The system has been brought into serious dis-repute. Many young drivers no longer evenbother to obtain provisional licences and a largenumber of other individuals drive on suchlicences indefinitely. A car is the equivalent of alethal weapon. For that reason, it is incumbent onthe Minister of Transport to ensure that respectfor good driving is cultivated among youngpeople. Little has been done in this regard inrecent years.

The failure of the Minister and, in particular,his predecessor, Deputy Brennan, to address thearea of driver testing and put in place a systemthat works has led to widespread disregard forgood driving standards and the consequentunacceptable levels of death and serious injury onour roads. The obvious dangers associated withallowing unqualified drivers to drive alone wasrecognised by the Minister’s predecessor, DeputyBrennan, in late 2003 when he announced hisintention to end the practice of those on pro-visional licences being allowed to drive unac-companied.

In December 2003, Deputy Brennan said:

I have made it quite clear that this practiceof driving unaccompanied has to finish. Thelegislation is being finalised and very soon itwill be compulsory to pass a test in order todrive on our roads.

Applications for driving tests had increaseddramatically during 2003, following a number ofstatements by the Minister off the top of his headabout his intentions to sort out the mess. Thesestatements, like so many others from the formerMinister for Transport, came to absolutelynothing. As the Minister responsible he said:

The waiting lists have been swelling up bigtime. The average wait is now 42 weeks and ayear ago it was only half that.

The same Minister did not appear to realise thathe had any role or responsibility in creating thatmess. He went on to say that despite the prob-lems the backlog in applications had caused, hewas glad to have “flushed out” the thousands ofpeople who had no intention of ever taking adriving test.

He created chaos and there was a mad rush bypeople to do their driving test. Unfortunately, thesame Minister who had responsibility for dealingwith this area, did nothing whatsover in terms ofputting in place a modern system that could dealwith the demand that exists for driving tests. Thatreport, following the Minister’s comments, wenton to say: “A driver testing agency, run as a semi-State agency, would be established in March, Mr.Brennan said, to run the system with a more pro-fessional commercial approach.” He was sointerested and hung-up on making every aspectof transport commercial that he did not do anygroundwork in terms of setting up the agency.

I have some sympathy with the current Mini-ster because he has inherited a mess as regardsdriver testing as well as so many other aspects oftransport policy because of the complete andutter negligence of his predecessor in office,Deputy Brennan. It was all about spin and hypeand daily press statements that caused chaos.There was little or no follow-up. He was sayingthat the legislation would be in place by March2004, and 12 months later we are only on SecondStage of that debate.

I requested figures recently from the Minister’sDepartment. They show that there is only one


driving tester for every 1,000 applicants waitingto sit the driving test. The data shows there arecurrently almost 120,000 people on waiting lists,but there are only 116 testers available at the var-ious test centres around the country. That is com-pletely inadequate. More interestingly, in spite ofall the comments made by the current Ministerand his predecessor, and the spiralling numbersof road deaths, a year ago there were 130 exam-iners at the 48 test centres around the countrycompared to 116 today. Incredibly, as the waitinglists expand the number of personnel available todeal with them decreases. I ask the Minister,again, to explain how that could be possibly. Is itnot indicative of serious negligence on the partof both the Minister and his predecessor, DeputyBrennan, that this has been allowed to get tocrisis point along with the fact that the number ofpersonnel required to deal with the problem hasbeen decreasing over the past year? Furthermore,the average waiting time for a driving test atmany test centres is extremely long. In Thurles,for example, the average waiting time is 43 weeksand in Nenagh and Carlow, 42 weeks. Thenational average is over 30 weeks.

It seems the Minister and his predecessor havereiterated time and again their desire to see thenumber of provisional licence holders on ourroads reduced dramatically. However, the per-sonnel have not been put in place to deal withthis backlog. It would seem that in spite of theroad fatalities and serious injuries arising, anddespite the many press statements and promises,nothing whatsoever has been done to sort out thechaos in the driver testing system.

I am sure the Minister, like other Deputies, hashad a good deal of correspondence from drivinginstructors who are quite concerned about theimplications for them of this legislation. It isimportant for the Minister to clarify that. I wel-come the fact that there is a move to sort out thesystem as regards instructors. As Deputy OliviaMitchell said, it is intolerable that anybody mayset up a driving school, regardless of whether heor she is a licensed driver. That area needs to besorted out urgently. From the viewpoint ofpeople learning to drive and consumer rights,clear safeguards should be in place to ensureadequate quality standards and to guarantee thatif someone signs up with the local driving school,it is a reputable operation. The person giving theinstruction must be fully licensed, initially as adriver, and also qualified to be an instructor. Cur-rently, no such system is in place and I urge theMinister to urgently introduce a licensing systemin this regard.

The Minister also needs to clarify the posi-tion of people already in the industry who havetaken steps to reach a quality standard, whichis relatively high at present, because they arequite concerned. Another predecessor of theMinister, Deputy Bobby Molloy, indicatedearlier to them that they would be included inthe system if they signed up to the voluntaryregister. They find themselves in a limbo at the

moment and do not know where they stand. Itis important the Minister recognises the stan-dards they meet at present and clarifies theposition as regards future eligibility or qualify-ing criteria.

I am concerned with a number of other areaswith regard to how the existing test systemoperates and the perception among the publicthat it is a mess. Why, for example, is theresuch variation in pass rates in the different testcentres? We talked about the average pass rateand I accept the Minister’s word that this isaround the European average. However, thereis quite a variation between the test centres,from a high pass rate of 66.4% in Shannon toa low of 47.3%. Again, the Minister needs tofind out why that is the case. Is it a case ofdifferent standards being applied within drivingschools or in the catchment areas for thosecentres? Why is there such a wide variation? Itis unacceptable for people who come along fortests in good faith, if their chances of passingdepend on the actual test centre they go to.This needs to be clarified and sorted out.

Another area of urgent concern is the rulesof the road. Two years ago, in March 2003, theMinister’s predecessor, Deputy Brennan, wasasked a question about the rules of the roadhandbook and when it would be updated.

Mr. Cullen: There are even older handbooksaround, going back to the time of previous Mini-sters for Transport.

Ms Shortall: That handbook is now so old thatthe Minister on the cover is Deputy Howlin. It isa 1995 publication.

Mr. Cullen: I found that out. I agree with theDeputy.

Ms Shortall: The Minister, Deputy Brennan,was asked when the book would be updated. Hesaid he was very conscious of the fact that itneeded to be updated, he had set up a reviewgroup and he expected that the consultative pro-cess he had established would report shortly andthat the new handbook would be produced. Thatwas two yeas ago and is another indication ofcomplete disregard for this whole area. I have acopy of the Rules of the Road booklet that is onsale today from the Government PublicationsOffice and available in all book shops. It is tenyears old. It makes no reference at all to the con-siderable amount of road safety legislation whichhas been passed by this House in the meantime.Neither does it make any reference to metricspeed limits.

Mr. Cullen: I have asked them to produce anew one.

Ms Shortall: That is not good enough. TheMinister’s predecessor said, two years ago, thathe was dealing with this as a matter of urgency


[Ms Shortall.]and now Deputy Cullen is saying he has askedthem to produce an updated one.

Mr. Cullen: I have only just become aware of it.

Ms Shortall: It is not good enough. The onlyavailable handbook on the rules of the road forlearner drivers is ten years old, which is notacceptable. If the Minister had any interest at allin road safety, he would have dealt with this as amatter of urgency. It is not acceptable to have tenyear old booklets available.

In most cases, less than two weeks notice isgiven to a candidate for a driving test. There arecases where people are on holidays or where theyfind it difficult to get time off work or otherresponsibilities. Some indication should be givento people so that they can have an idea of whenthe test is to take place. The people who haveaccess to the website can find that, which is fairenough. However, not everybody is in that situa-tion. I have come across people who have onlyhad about one week’s notice. That causes muchdifficulty so I ask the Minister to look at it.

Another area deals with the extension of thetest to cover certain minor mechanical aspects ofthe operation of a car. In September 2003, theformer Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan,spoke about these mechanical tests and statedthat the radical new regulations were being intro-duced within weeks to bring Ireland into line withEuropean requirements. The current Ministermade a lot of this in his speech as it was embar-rassing when the EU decided to take actionagainst Ireland for its failure to comply. He madea lot of it in his speech, but he played it down. Yetin September 2003, his predecessor stated that itwas an urgent matter and would have to be donein a matter of weeks. Like so many aspects of thework that the former Minister supposedly carriedout in the Department, nothing further was heardof it.

Mr. Cullen: It is in now. The Deputy shouldknow that.

Ms Shortall: I know it is in now, but it is invery belatedly.

Mr. Cullen: I can only do what I can do.

Ms Shortall: He only did so after the EU drewhis attention to it and threatened to take actionagainst him. It is inexplicable that the Ministerhas dropped the requirement for people undergo-ing a test to have a valid tax disc. There is nosense in that at all. We are trying to get com-pliance on licences, tax and insurance. This is onearea where learner drivers could undergo somescreening process as they must have an up-to-datetax disc. I cannot understand why the Ministerhas removed that requirement and it should bereinstated.

Another area deals with gender balance amongtesters. I am sure that due to equality legislation,

those posts are available to females as well asmales. I have not yet heard of anyone that hasbeen tested by a female driving tester. I wouldlike the Minister to provide the House with thefigures on that when he is summing up. He shouldtake positive steps to ensure that we have got toa stage where there was an equality of male andfemale testers within the services. That isimportant.

Mr. Cullen: There is a general shortage oftesters.

Ms Shortall: Many women undergoing the testwould prefer to be tested by a female. We shouldhave the same balance among the testers as thereis among those sitting the test.

The Minister intends to bring the operation ofthe NCT under this new agency. I welcome thatbecause there is much concern among the publicabout the standards of the NCT. There is also alack of accountability because it is privatelyoperated. Some newspaper investigations haveuncovered practices that are not acceptable. I amglad that the new agency will take responsibilityfor that. I hope that there will be greaterresponsibility and clarity on the pass rates and thevarious hurdles through which people have to goto get their car passed.

It is all very well to set up a new agency and Iwelcome that. Unless the Minister provides theresources necessary for that agency to increasesignificantly the number of driving testers and toput in place acceptable standards for drivinglicensing, no improvement will be made. TheMinister’s predecessor made a complete dog’sdinner of driver testing. It is far worse than it waswhen he came to office.

The figures for serious accidents on our roadsare worse than they were two years ago. It is notrocket science to draw a relation between thosetwo facts. The Minister must ensure that this newagency is in a position to put in place a moderndriver testing system that is adequately resourcedand staffed. This must be done to meet the greatdemand that is out there, which will continueover the next few years. We need forward plan-ning from someone who can secure the resourcesfrom the Minister for Finance to ensure that wehave a modern driving tester system. The currentsituation is inexcusable and it is highly irrespon-sible of the Minister and his predecessor to haveallowed this situation to develop. The Ministermust show his mettle to get the resources for thenew agency. Unless they are provided, we will beback to square one and there will be no improve-ment in the existing system.

Mr. J. Breen: My first comment on the DriverTesting and Standards Authority Bill 2004 isabout the ridiculous backlog of people waiting tosit their test. Current pass rates at national levelare approximately 55%. Not only does almostevery second person fail, but candidates have towait six months for the privilege of doing so.


Waiting times for driving tests are up to 42 weeks.A temporary visitor to Ireland may legally drivehere providing he or she holds a valid licence oran international driving permit, issued in his orher country of residence. That period is for sixmonths for those residing here or 12 months forvisitors. If someone happens to be one of theunlucky candidates who cannot simply exchangehis or her licence, that person must join the leng-thy queues in Ireland and pass a driving testbefore an Irish licence can be granted.

The only positive aspect to the Irish system isthat before undergoing this test, a provisionallicence may be obtained from the appropriateregional licensing authority.

Let us hope that the new driver testing andstandards authority will accelerate delivery of anenhanced and customer focused driver testingservice to the public. It should bring a new focusand a wider flexibility to driver testing with theinitial emphasis on reducing the waiting time fordriving tests.

I call on the Minister to provide for the recruit-ment of additional testers and to give testingpriority to individuals who can produce documen-tary evidence of their urgent need to have a driv-ing licence for health or work reasons. The highvolume of applications is unacceptable and morehas to be done to reduce waiting lists. With thenew standards authority in place, I hope that wecan look forward to more people attending a driv-ing test appointment and that people will complywith the requirements, considering that themajority are legal requirements. If we do notplace strong emphasis on these requirements,some people may feel that they can continue todrive with a provisional licence. That is a keypriority to road safety and should reduce thelong-term reliance on provisional licences. Theauthority must cut the waiting time for drivingtests and lay down strict targets in areas such asthe length of waiting times, the number of testscarried out annually and the improvement ofboth driving testers and instructors.

Why is there a waiting time of 12 months for adriving test? Why are 300,000 people in Irelandstill on a provisional licence? We cannot expectto feel safe on our roads with such a high numberoperating on provisional licences. We think welive in a modern society, yet we are failing tomake any real impact in reforming one ofIreland’s most important systems, to move withthe times and get rid of provisional licences thatare a problem and a hindrance to motorists.

The standards authority should have astandardised system for all instructors and testersto avoid the embarrassing variations in drivingtest pass rates among different counties through-out Ireland. The Minister must immediately pro-vide for more testers and instructors with astandardised qualification. This must be done toavoid the inevitability of people speeding, drivingthrough stop signs and yield signs and improperlyovertaking. We continue to point the finger atalcohol for most accidents on our roads, but

surely driving errors are also a contributoryfactor. Given a penalty points system which isclearly falling into disrepute and failing to deliverpositive results as people continue to die on theroads, it is time the standards authority deliveredon its promise to implement the real changes wedeserve.

Ireland’s dysfunctional driver Iicensing systemhas made the roads more dangerous as peoplewho fail their tests continue to drive unsupervisedon provisional licences. The practice dates backto a slower paced rural Ireland in which cars wereluxuries and roads were quiet. In today’s urban-ised and traffic-clogged country, provisional driv-ers compete for space with qualified drivers whileState-run licensing centres are unable to keep upwith demand. Will the Minister reduce waitinglists immediately by providing extra instructorsand testers? He must ensure that private drivinginstructors and testers comply with a standardisededucation system in addressing the problem.

If the Minister were a resident of Carrigaholtwith a provisional licence who had to travel towork in Galway or Ennis, he would find it verydifficult to have a qualified driver with him at alltimes. It is a 70 mile round trip to Ennis whichplaces an unfair burden on people in the areawho must wait months on end for a test. They arewell qualified to drive but cannot get the piece ofpaper which allows them to do so alone. Will theMinister consider the backward areas of the westwhose people cannot afford to wait and wait fordriving tests? Some people are losing employ-ment as a result of their lack of a full licence.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: The Minister for Financecame to the Chamber and then slipped out again.I presume he was under the impression that hisquestions were coming up. Can I assume there isno obstacle to continuing through our slot?

An Ceann Comhairle: Questions are not sched-uled until 3.30 p.m.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: I welcome the opportunityto speak on the Bill and to make a number ofpoints. There is a need to question the processinvolved in the delivery of services by the Statewhich involves the separation of functions amongthe Civil Service and publicly owned agencies.We must ask whether the process necessarilyguarantees improved service delivery. The mainobjective of the Bill appears to be a mere restruc-turing of the process rather than the introductionof innovative new approaches to driver training,safety and instruction.

It has been fortuitous for the Government thatthe strategic thinking which directed the Stateover the last 50 years has brought great benefitsand economic success. While the thinking whichbegan with T.K. Whitaker and our investment ineducation have helped to bring us significant suc-cess, the current Government in particular hasfailed to deliver services locally. The Civil Servicehas been unable to deliver services effectively for


[Mr. Eamon Ryan.]which incredible failure at a time of economicplenty the Government receives and deserves agreat deal of appropriate criticism. Driver testingis a prime example of the anarchical circum-stances which have developed. There areextremely long waiting times for tests as a resultof our inability to organise our simple affairs.

I acknowledge a certain justification for themaintenance of the central Civil Service Depart-ments as the strategic planning element of Stateservices coupled with what might be termed “de-livery agencies”. I am seriously concerned,however, that there is a risk Parkinson’s law willapply whereby the creation of agencies leads sim-ply to the creation of extensive bureaucracieswhich are expensive to run and duplicate servicesand resources. Such agencies are not necessarilymore efficient or better at providing services thanexisting systems.

A board is to be established through the legis-lation before the House. As a Deputy who hasconsidered the operations of various boards, Iidentify the creation of boards as the area inwhich we have been least effective. Politicallyappointed boards in Aer Lingus, An Post and arange of other State agencies with which I amfamiliar have failed to recognise and anticipateproblems. The board of An Post failed to involveitself in any real strategic thinking within thecompany. When I see the establishment of aplethora of further boards, I must ask whetherthey constitute an extension of the Fianna Failmachine and apparatus. For what gain will the11 members of the board of the proposed driver-testing authority be provided with compensationfor expenses and whatever other financial pro-vision is made?

The Minister said the strategic planning func-tion will remain within the Department, which Iagree is appropriate. If the civil servant at assist-ant secretary level appointed to run the proposedagency must report to the Minister every year,what will the board do? If the Department canprovide strategic planning, what will be the func-tion of the board? What does the Minister believethe 11 members of the board will provide thatcannot be provided from within the Departmentor which will not represent a duplication of CivilService expertise? The initial sections of the Billprovide for the elaborate establishment of boardswhich I fear will constitute simply another jobs-for-the-boys arrangement within the Fianna FailAdministration.

I could not agree more with Deputy Shortall’sanalysis that we face a crisis of delivery which wascreated or at least exacerbated by the previousMinister. The wording the current Minister usedto describe the way circumstances arose was quitesweet. He indicated that the waiting list problememerged in 2003 as a result of concerns aboutstiffer regulations due to reports in the media asif those reports emerged out of thin air. Heimplied that the media made a sudden decisionthat there would be stiffer regulation which had

nothing to do with the previous Minister who waswell known to air his thoughts on Sundays on thenational airwaves if he felt for whatever reasonthat it was too quiet in RTE or the constituencyof Dublin South. Deputy Shortall was correct toidentify the mess we are trying to sort out as apolitically created one.

In sorting out the mess, I urge the Minister togo a great deal further than he proposes. I notedin his contribution that he intends to introduce onCommittee State wider provisions on the remit ofthe authority in the area of road safety. I encour-age him to do so. It is difficult on Second Stage todebate a Bill when we do not know what furtherprovisions will be included. I encourage the Mini-ster to add a number of further provisions as Iwish the Bill had been more radical in the firstplace.

Systems are in place in other countries whichwe should examine. Rather than provide for asimple system in which an L plate leads to a fulllicence, we should consider introducing a systemin which one must sit a test before receiving alicence which allows one to drive. The initial testshould entitle one to an L plate licence and, afterdue instruction and testing, one should obtain aprovisional or P licence which would apply fortwo years. In such a system, specific rules wouldapply to a provisionally licensed driver during thefirst two years on the road. Many accidentsinvolve people who have recently passed theirtests and driven away from the testing centre likeMichael Schumacher under the impression thatthey were kings of the road.

Under an alternative system, a person drivingaway from the test centre would do so with a Pplate on his or her car to indicate that he or sheis only newly tested and approved as a driver. Ifspeeding or other penalty-point offences werecommitted in the first two years of driving,especially stringent punishments would beapplied. After two years as a provisional driver,a person would be entitled to a full licence. Tointroduce such a system would have been to makea radical and appropriate change. I regret verymuch that the opportunity provided by the Billwas not used to review innovatively the driver-testing system.

If we are to establish a bureaucracy with aboard of directors which incurs expenses drivingto Ballina, we should provide it with a slightlywider remit. The Minister referred to safety andpenalty points issues, but the authority could alsobe involved in the introduction of electronic tol-ling which requires a national approach. Giventhe amount of toll roads being introduced aroundthe country, they should be free flow and variablein order to manage traffic demand in addition toraising revenue, the function for which the Mini-ster has designed them. There should be a tran-sponder in every car so that it can be operatedelectronically wherever one goes. This will helpstop ridiculous delays at toll booths and the costsinvolved in their construction. The authoritycould also examine electronic tolling on the West


Link and other roads. Otherwise, what will theboard do?

I wish to address the important and frustratingissue of democratic accountability specifically tothe Ceann Comhairle, with whom I am in moreregular correspondence than with the Minister.No matter how many appropriate questions I askregarding road or rail policy I never hear backfrom the Minister. I hear instead from the CeannComhairle telling me it is not a matter for theMinister but the NRA. This has been the mostfrustrating experience in my time as a Member ofthe House. It does not strengthen or prove thequality of our democracy, rather it is one of itsbiggest threats. We are increasingly restricted.Members on both sides of the House have a valu-able and useful role in overseeing and checkingthe effectiveness of our expenditure and delivery.The inability of this House to question organis-ations such as the NRA, as well as this new insti-tution given the similar manner in which it hasbeen established, is a profound reversal of ourdemocratic institutions. Will the Minister con-sider this and respond to the question onSecond Stage?

I look forward to Committee Stage when wewill perhaps look to expand, improve and add tothe provisions of this Bill, which currently rep-resent a very limited and poor response to thechaos left behind by the previous Minister.

Mr. Crowe: We must welcome any measurewhich helps to standardise and bring driving testsunder one uniform regulatory body. It is also wel-come if it helps address some of the more com-mon complaints relating to the test. The Irishdriving test is internationally regarded as one ofthe most difficult, as proven by the large numberof people, currently 54%, who fail on their firstattempt. The issue of differences between variouscentres could also be examined. It might be anec-dotal evidence but people who sit the test alwaystalk in terms of which days are worse. Is it downto the quality of the test and the people sitting it?There is a belief that testers must fail a certainamount of people per week.

It is good that drivers must prove themselvescompetent before receiving a full licence. Statis-tics relating to road deaths prove that too manyaccidents and deaths are caused by fault on thepart of one or more drivers. However, most ofthese are probably unrelated to the standardsrequired to pass the test, especially when peopleare driving at high speed or have consumed toomuch alcohol. The solution to this lies mainly out-side the scope of the test.

Many complaints regarding the test concernwhat people believe to be technical demandswhich drivers are unlikely to meet in real life.Perhaps, as part of this review of how the systemworks, we could take another look at the contentof the test to ensure it relates more closely to thebasic necessities of driving. If somebody is com-petent in those skills it is unfair that they shouldfail because they are unable to execute a more

difficult manoeuvre to the satisfaction of thetester.

Other Deputies referred to the NCT. One needonly go to an NCT centre to see people who areworried sick in case their car does not pass.People do not talk to each other and there is nota happy atmosphere. The driving test can be verynerve racking. Deputy Shortall mentioned theissue of gender, and it can be more worrying fora woman to get into a car with a strange man.There is also the issue of the driver asking thetester to clarify something and the tester beingreluctant to answer because he or she is not sup-posed to get involved in a discussion. The atmos-phere surrounding the test is an issue which couldbe considered.

There is a regular complaint regarding the longperiod of time it takes to get a test. The currentaverage waiting time is eight months, and in somecases much longer. It depends on the area inwhich one lives. I have heard of some people whowere given an initial indication that their testwould be in three months, only to be laterinformed they would have to wait a further threeor four months. There are big differences in thetime one must wait depending on the part of thecountry in which one lives. This relates to thenumber of testers available. According to theDepartment’s statistics supplied in a recent replyto a parliamentary question, there are currently114 testers compared to 97 at the beginning of2000. Some areas with high demand have notexperienced an increase which is reflected inlonger waiting times. This is a particular problemin the south west where Limerick and Killarneyhave one less tester and Tralee still has two. Per-haps the authority or Minister could examine thiswhen looking at resources.

What powers will the authority have withregard to those engaged in commercial teachingof drivers to prepare them for the test? Will itdevise a standard teaching system which requiresthat driving instructors are subject to an accept-able standard? The issue of standardisation fordriving teachers has been raised and there is aneed for clarity. The authority could also examinethe conditions under which some instructors areemployed. While some of this is more properly amatter for the Department responsible for work-ing conditions, safety issues are involved. A driv-ing instructor in my area told me he was workingup to 11 hours per day. That would not be accept-able for any driver in a commercial concern, andit is doubly unacceptable when a personinstructing another is suffering from the effects oflong hours. They are out on a public highway andwill not be able to competently show anybody therules of the road. They are possibly half asleep.It is not acceptable and there is a need forregulation.

The changes to the test in line with EU regu-lation, as recently announced by the Minister,appear straightforward and require a minimumbasic understanding on the part of the driverregarding how to check oil levels, the working of


[Mr. Crowe.]indicators and so on. The more familiar a personis with their vehicle the more competent he orshe will be and it will contribute to safety.

The introduction of speed limits in kilometresrather than miles has caused some controversy. Itis similar to the introduction of the euro whenpeople experienced something of a culture shock.However, the adjustment to kilometres will be acentral part of both driving lessons and tests.

With regard to the Bill, perhaps the Ministercould clarify a number of issues regarding theappointment of the board and the chief executiveof the authority. Section 12(iv) cites the criteriafor membership which includes a broad and com-prehensive range of experience in areas related toall aspects for which the authority is responsible.However, it does not make clear the procedurewith which the Minister will select members. Ilistened to Deputy Eamon Ryan’s points regard-ing the boards. When we have a problem we setup a board or an agency to sort it out. Will thepositions be advertised so as to allow open com-petition and public scrutiny? How will the boardbe appointed?

3 o’clock

Clarification is required with regard to theissue of driving instructors. We need more testers,and figures suggest that numbers have not signifi-

cantly increased in recent years.There is a crisis and the waiting list,which was at 230,000, is increasing. In

particular, it is affecting young people who areawaiting driving tests. Many young people whodo not have access to public transport face crazycar insurance costs. The only way to shorten thewaiting time for driving tests is to hireadditional testers.

A previous speaker referred to people whodrive to the testing centre, fail their test and thendrive away. It is a crazy system which makes non-sense of the law and represents one of the lowpoints of the testing system since people can driveaway with a failure notice.

The quality standards are currentlyunacceptable and must be improved. I welcomethe proposed establishment of the Driver Testingand Standards Authority but its narrow remit willhave to be widened. The number of learner driv-ers on the roads is unacceptable but we cannotreduce the numbers until we have more testers.

Mr. Dennehy: I am grateful for the opportunityto comment on the Bill. I have listened to the lastfour speakers with interest. Like Deputy Crowe,I am concerned that the 54% of drivers who failtheir tests are allowed to drive away. However, ifthe Minister introduced a regulation forcing suchpeople to leave their cars at the testing centre andtake a taxi home, would Sinn Fein support thatchange? The problem needs to be examined butsuch a measure would require widespreadsupport.

Everything that has been attempted to dealwith this problem has attracted sneering and snig-gering. In such cases, people are happy to have a

go at the Minister but not in a helpful fashion.Deputy Crowe mentioned the issue of peopleawaiting their NCT test and suffering a cultureshock when their vehicles fail. I assure the House,however, that it is a far bigger shock when a carhits your vehicle on the road at 70 mph. I hadthat experience as a back-seat passenger. Theaccident put me and my two colleagues off theroad for five or six months. It is a far greatershock than that suffered by people who are wait-ing for their NCT tests.

If I drive to Cork this evening after dark I willmeet at least ten cars on the road with only oneheadlight working, despite the fact that there arefewer old cars on the road. The idea of the NCTtest was to remove dangerous vehicles from theroads. People may argue that the NCT test isdepriving them of their vehicles, but that is thedifficulty — the beal bocht excuse is used againstevery change that is introduced. The sneering andsniggering that has gone on concerning the driv-ing test and the NCT test is unhelpful.

Deputy Shortall and other Opposition speakerssaid the Minister was wrong and there was almostan element of gloating in their comments. Thebottom line, however, is that we are losing 400people a year in road accidents and the Ministeris trying to do something about it. Every time theGovernment tries to do something there is oppo-sition to it. Everyone in opposition has a view asto what should be done but when the Govern-ment tries to do something it is opposed.Deputies should be helpful and supportiveinstead.

The common thread in the last four contri-butions to this debate was that everyone bar thedriver is at fault. According to previous contribu-tors, the national testing authority, the testers, theMinister, his predecessor and everybody else wasat fault except the drivers who are causing theaccidents.

In the past, I heard the same arguments usedagainst safety helmets and reinforced boots indangerous situations. Every possible reason wasused as to why people could not wear such safetygear. Approximately eight or nine years ago, Iparticipated in a seat-belt initiative with the localGarda chief superintendent in Cork. At first, Idid not believe the Garda statistics that 54% ofpeople did not wear seat belts. I felt that the fig-ures could not be correct. I was fascinated later,however, at the number of friends and colleagueswho told me why they could not wear seat belts.The answer is the same in both cases: if onecannot carry out the required safety procedures,one should not be able to drive or work in anunsafe environment. Let us get real about this.Testers are not causing road crashes and neitheris the Minister for Transport. I am sure that hisdriver keeps within the speed limit most of thetime.

Those of us who have been involved in roadaccidents or near accidents know what it is like.I recall seeing another driver approaching me atapproximately 70 mph on the wrong side of a nar-


row country road in County Waterford. It was aharrowing experience.

Two days ago, I was driving towards a bendin County Laois when an articulated truck cametowards me on the wrong side of the road. Thedriver was on a bend and had to cross a continu-ous white line to pass another articulated truck.It was on top of a hill near a bend where therewere signs warning drivers not to overtake. IfLaois County Council had not put hard shoulderson that road during the past 18 months, I couldhave been killed on Tuesday morning. That is afact, and it has nothing to do with driving testers,it concerns drivers.

Deputy Pat Breen was correct in saying that wehave a problem with the waiting list and we mustdeal with it. The purpose of the Bill is to establishthe Driver Testing and Standards Authority.

Deputy Eamon Ryan said we were setting upa Fianna Fail grouping but I do not know whetherall the driving testers are in Fianna Fail. Suchcynical and gloating remarks have led us to a sit-uation where we have the worst record inEurope, way ahead of anybody else. Such sneer-ing and sniggering may be grand for DeputyEamon Ryan on his bike, but the rest of us whodecide to drive are entitled to a safe journey. Iwill not tolerate that kind of commentary. We aredemanding that something be done about roadsafety and the Minister is tackling it. He is estab-lishing the new authority to co-ordinate testingand safety standards.

At yesterday’s meeting of the Committee ofPublic Accounts I asked the Secretary General ofthe Department of Transport about the \2.7 mill-ion funding for the National Safety Authority. Inoted that it was a small amount of money con-sidering the level of road fatalities and the valueof one life, let alone 400. The Secretary Generalexplained that a further \45 million went to theNational Roads Authority to deal with safety andthat other funding is scattered around also. It istime we had a body such as the proposed DriverTesting and Standards Authority that will be ableto take the initiative on safety as well as otherissues.

A previous speaker referred to the role of theGarda Sıochana, but its role is not to preventroad fatalities, although hopefully that is a by-product of its job. The Garda Sıochana’s job is toenforce the rules of the road, but individualgardaı cannot police every single driver. We needto get real about the problem of poor drivingstandards, which annoys me. Most of all, I amannoyed that every time we discuss road acci-dents, people say they are caused by everyone butthe drivers concerned. I am a responsible driverand know that I must drive within the speedlimits, although it may not happen all the time.For instance, I would not drive while watchingthe speedometer to check if I am one or two kilo-metres per hour over the limit, but I am alwayswithin range of the limit and try to drive safely.The issues of drink driving or using defectivevehicles are the responsibility of drivers and these

matters must be enforced. It is annoying thatpeople shy away from their responsibilities. It isalways somebody else who is at fault. Accidentlevels are bad but we are not getting the pointacross. It is always somebody else’s job to ensureaccident prevention. Everyone must look at whathe or she can do in this regard.

It is incredible that 54% of people do notaccept the need to wear seat belts in cars. That isjust one aspect of the problem. People still driveat reckless speeds. Last Thursday, I witnessedfour incidents of dangerous driving within twomiles of the Red Cow roundabout. The first tookplace at Newlands Cross where a young femaledriver crossed the Naas Road at least two orthree seconds after the green light had come onfor traffic on the main Dublin-Cork road. Shetook a chance to cross that road at full speed. Aman turning right, again across the Naas Road,caused the second incident. He went into themedian strip without any indication. This resultedin everyone having to jam on their brakes.

These are the kinds of incidents which are caus-ing fatalities and they must be dealt with. Drivinginstruction has a big part to play in this matter.People are talking about the 54% driving test fail-ure rate as if it were due to the testers. DeputyCrowe said the failure rate was due to bad Mon-days, bad Fridays or bad testers. How stupid canwe get? The reason is that people were not prop-erly prepared for their tests or had not been prop-erly trained. It is not the case that testers werewrong. That is typical of the general approach toroad safety and it will have to change. As publicrepresentatives we will have to change as we aresupposed to be leaders in the community. If aperson comes whingeing to us about failing theirtest we should ask them the reason. We shouldask what they did wrong and how many drivinglessons they had before taking their test.

Another speaker referred to the need for alicence to drive a car. If one went to buy a gun oranother dangerous weapon there would be allsorts of conditions attached to it. The differencewith a car is that it is many times bigger and inmost cases it is more lethal and more dangerous.A greater number of cars than ever before are onthe roads. More cars were sold in the previoustwo months than ever before in an equivalentperiod, in spite of the claim by vehicle distribu-tors last year that sales would fall dramaticallybecause of our tax regime and that they would allgo bankrupt. Lo and behold, we have seen thehighest sales figures ever for January andFebruary. We will have to provide a road net-work to cope with this increased capacity. We canall help by driving within the speed limits, avoid-ing drink driving, ensuring our cars are roadwor-thy and so on.

Insufficient lighting on cars is a particular prob-lem. People ask how that can be the case with thestringent level of testing that is in place. Unfortu-nately, a car driver may not be aware that his orher headlight is gone. This is a crazy situation.They used to be called one-eyed monsters in the


[Mr. Dennehy.]days when we had bad cars but we should be ableto do better nowadays.

Observation of the rules of the road and gener-ally showing courtesy are crucial. Unfortunately,manners on the road have disimproved signifi-cantly. People tend not to stop at orange lights.It is a stupid cliche to say that accidents will hap-pen — they do not just happen; they have a cause.I respectfully suggest that in most cases the driveris at fault.

A TCD academic has made the case that up to10% of fatalities could be as a result of suicide. Ido not know and I do not have the expertise tocomment on the matter. However, every fatalityshould be forensically analysed to discover thecause, in so far as that is possible. Where drink isinvolved this should be made known, albeit tragicfor a family when a son or daughter is killed. Inthis way we can try to prevent it happening infuture.

We are not dealing with the matter seriouslyenough at present. It took 3,636 deaths inNorthern Ireland before people really knuckleddown and became serious about preventing moredeaths there. How many more people must bekilled on the roads before we do something aboutit? I do not refer to the Minister and the Sec-retary General of his Department who are facingup to their significant responsibility in this regard;it is everyone’s responsibility to ensure somethingis done. Everyone who drives is equally respon-sible for ensuring we do not have crashesresulting in serious injury or fatalities.

Perhaps we could frighten people more, as wasthe case in Northern Ireland where the financialcost of fatalities and serious accidents waspointed out, let alone the personal hardship. Wemust remember that in all cases accidents arecaused. At some stage all drivers have probablythanked God they got away with something, be itovertaking carelessly or whatever. Driving is notgetting any easier as the road network increases.I ask Deputy Eamon Ryan to take note of a pointI made yesterday to the Secretary General of theDepartment that drivers are much safer on a dualcarriageway or motorway than on a secondaryroad. I am entitled to have money spent to ensuremy safety.

If one or two people were killed due to anenvironmental problem such as a poisoned watersupply or whatever, an inquiry would be set upand we would take immediate action. We wouldwork in a unified manner to prevent others beingaffected. Why cannot we do the same to preventfurther road deaths? We must look seriously atthe matter. I do not care what anyone says, wehave not been taking the matter seriouslyenough.

The Minister sensibly introduced changes tothe driving test to the effect that a driver shouldknow something about the mechanical aspects ofcars. Mr. Walsh from the Irish School of Motor-ing, which is one of the top driving schools, statedthat the ability to change a wheel should also be

included in the driving test. I accept this and Ihope the Minister will alter the test in this regardin due course. It is probably the most commoncause of stoppages for motor vehicles.

Let me refer to the response of some partyspokespersons on this issue. Senator Morrisseystated that the changes were cosmetic and farci-cal. Deputy Olivia Mitchell stated the changeswere farcical and amounted to tinkering at theedges. It is plain stupid to take that approachwhen somebody tries to improve matters. If onlyone life were saved as a result of people knowingmore then it would be worthwhile.

The analogy with a gun can also be applied inthis context. A person would be taken through allthe dangers before buying such a weapon, yet ifa person has enough money, he or she can buy acar without difficulty. That has to change and Iurge the Minister to do something about it. Hehas a common sense approach to things. I hopehe will do something about it.

The issue of people failing their test and drivingaway on their own is important. It was the casethat one needed to have a fully qualified driverin the car. If a person fails the test, by implicationhe or she is incapable of driving safely on theroad. This issue must be dealt with.

According to statistics, at least 10% of thosekilled on the roads hold provisional licences. Theindication that cars are being driven by holdersof provisional licences is the display of L-plates,back and front. The Minister for Transport hasgiven us a good run on the motorways and so onso that one can now drive at 62.5 mph in one areaand 73 mph in another. However, it is dauntingto be overtaken by a car displaying L-plates trav-elling at 90 mph or 95 mph. This issue must beexamined because the credibility of the signs hasgone.

Most drivers treat L-plates with respect so that,when they encounter a car with L-plates trying tocross a junction, they tend to give them due court-esy and recognition for the fact that they arelearning — a position they might rememberthemselves. However, when one is passed on theDublin to Cork or any other road at that speed,the learner driver is exceeding the speed limit orthe plates are being misused and should beremoved from the car. This is an issue which theMinister must examine in the context of safety.

In 2002, of the 346 people who were killed infatal crashes, 313 had full licences and 33 had pro-visional licences. This represents more than10%. I am concerned about the plethora ofgroups dealing with safety issues. I have a part-icular hobby horse which I have raised on threeoccasions with the National Roads Authoritywhich concerns pedestrian islands. Most of themfeature a bollard which is erected for traffic calm-ing purposes. I guess that 50% of these bollards— the blue boxes one can see on the roads — arelevelled, which indicates that something is wrong.The problem is that people do not see the islandsbecause the lighting in the area is usually bad.However, the NRA has refused point blank to fix


reflective studs in the base of these islands. Iraised this issue in the debate on the previousroads Bill so perhaps the Minister would examinethe matter.

This is a topic which deserves everyone’s atten-tion. The Minister is correct that the new bodywill be more focused and flexible in taking initiat-ives because some change is needed. I wish theMinister well in his endeavours and commend theBill the House.

Mr. Murphy: The general objectives which thisBill wishes to promote are to be welcomed,namely, quicker driving tests and better drivingstandards. However, one must ask why this Bill isnecessary. Is the Government losing confidencein the Civil Service and its ability to control anddirect public servants? The Department of Trans-port has, or should have, all the necessary powersand that this Bill is being proposed exposes thefact that the Department must not be competentto deal with these issues in the Minister’s opinion.

Whatever about the Department’s ability, it isthe Minister’s responsibility. That both he and hispredecessor have failed to manage the Depart-ment to get the desired results has led to theintroduction of this Bill. When an issue becomestoo troublesome and too difficult to handle, theimmediate reaction of Ministers in this Govern-ment is to set up a quango to distance themselvesfrom the problems. This approach has the addedadvantage for Ministers of helping them avoiddirect accountability in the Dail.

The first question the Minister must answer iswhy he thinks this authority, with a new chiefexecutive, will be more successful than theDepartment of which he is the chief executive.Either he must admit the incompetency of hispredecessor or admit that he is not capable ofmanaging this section of his Department. Is heblaming his civil servants, which seems to be adeveloping trend within the Government, or isthe Minister just commencing a new publicrelations exercise which will portray to the publicthat the passing of this legislation is a job done asfar as he is concerned and that from now on thenew authority can be blamed for any problemswhich arise?

This is a cynical exercise. The Minister knowswell that this relatively small administrative jobcould be done well by his civil servants if theresources were made available to them. He andthe Minister for Finance have no intention ofmaking these resources available in the Depart-ment so he needs someone else to do the job forhim and take the blame for this issue. The pre-vious Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan,made this one of his priorities on entering theDepartment of Transport.

We have heard recently that yet another bonusscheme to encourage testers to work extra hoursis to be introduced. That funding request hasagain been sent to the Department of Financeand negotiations are ongoing with IMPACT tofacilitate this. We have been told that under this

plan, 117 full-time testers will be offered a bonusif they meet a set quota of tests in six months.The Department hopes that 80 testers will beattracted by this bonus scheme which will lead tothe possibility that approximately 40,000 extratests will be carried out this year. A similarscheme failed in 2003 and the scheme was notavailable in 2004 due to lack of funding and finan-cial constraints, even though the scheme was onlyestimated to cost \2 million.

Some experts have suggested that the use ofsimulators could be used as a training or eventesting device. The airline industry has used simu-lators for training pilots since the Second WorldWar. Skid pads are also an excellent trainingfacility, particularly for young drivers. However,again the resources were not made available. Thelogic for driver testing is to try to ensure a betterstandard of driving to save lives. This is the samelogic which was used to introduce the penaltypoints system which worked very well in thebeginning until motorists realised that the passingof the law was about as far as the Governmentwould go.

Just as the Minister starved the driver testingsection of his Department of funds to implementan effective test system, the Garda Sıochana wasdeprived of resources to implement the pointssystem. A great idea that saved lives was dimin-ished by the Government’s refusal to provide theresources necessary to implement its own pro-posals. The recent introduction of metric speedlimits was a good idea but again it was put intooperation without due planning and assessment.

The Department has stated that regional roadsare to be reassessed with the clear implicationthat speed limits will be increased on the betterones, with which I agree. However, this shouldhave been done before the introduction of thesystem. How is the public to have respect forthese limits when the Government which intro-duced them immediately admitted that regionalroads needed to be reassessed? This is anothergood idea for road safety which has been dimin-ished because of the Government’s continuingincompetence.

To solve the lack of implementation of the pen-alty points system and other responsibilitieswhich are clearly the Minister’s, it is to be placedin private hands. A network of speed cameras isto be operated by private companies. Needless tosay, the reclassification of regional roads will notbe the responsibility of the Minister. This job, andthe blame if the occasion arises, will be passed tolocal authorities. At least on this occasion thoseresponsible will be accountable to the electorate.Much of the road safety strategy was initiallypromised at the launch of the previous roadsafety strategy in 1998. The strategy clearly setout a timetable of enforcement, education andlegislative organisational measures, whichincluded the deployment of additional mobilespeed detection units by 1998. Few of these haveyet been provided. Garda equipment in the infor-mation technology area was to have been com-

79 Priority 3 March 2005. Questions 80

[Mr. Murphy.]pletely upgraded by 2000. We are now told thismight happen in 2006.

Debate adjourned.

Ceisteanna — Questions.

Priority Questions.

————

Pension Provisions.

1. Mr. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance ifhe has examined the take-up of tax relief for pen-sion contributions across different income categ-ories; if he has satisfied himself with the incen-tives in the tax code for the provision for old age;and if the maturity of SSIAs offers an opportunityto promote a wider provision for pensions.[7436/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The latestfigures published in the 2003 annual report of theRevenue Commissioners indicate that in theshort tax year, April to December 2001, the costof tax relief on pension contributions was tenta-tively estimated at approximately \2 billion. It isnot possible at present to examine the take up ofthe tax relief for all pension contributions acrossdifferent income categories. This is because therelevant information is not available to the Rev-enue Commissioners as the tax relief for pensioncontributions for employees is normally given atsource, that is, the taxable income is the incomenet of pension contributions by employees.

However, data are available in respect of thetax relief for contributions to retirement annuitycontracts, RACs, across different income categor-ies. Retirement annuity contracts are used by theself-employed and by employees who are not inpensionable employment. It is intended to exam-ine these data in the context of the review of pen-sion reliefs which forms part of the review of taxreliefs for high earners.

There are a number of tax measures to makeprovision for old age. These include capital allow-ances in respect of nursing homes and housingfor the aged and infirm, relief for health expenseswhich includes relief for approved nursing homefees, a carer’s allowance and a home carer’s taxcredit as well as tax relief for payments to over65 year olds under deeds of covenant. These pro-visions clearly indicate that the Government con-tinues to have the best interests and long-termcare of the elderly in our society at the top ofits agenda.

Regarding the maturity of SSIAs, the use towhich the SSIA moneys are put is ultimately amatter for the individual account holder. Anysuggestion for further incentives by way of taxconcessions to facilitate further savings on pen-sion contributions will have to be judged in theoverall context of Government priorities andresource constraints.

Mr. Bruton: I am surprised at the sanguineview the Minister takes of tax relief for pensioncontributions. More than half of workers do nothave pension cover and these are predominantlylow income earners. Does the Minister agree thatthere is a real difficulty with the distribution ofpension benefits? At the top end, people haveunlimited opportunities if an employer is con-tributing to a pension for a director. On the otherhand, many ordinary workers have no pensioncover. Does the Minister not agree that there is aneed for action to address this huge gap both interms of equity and lack of pension cover?

Does he not agree that the SSIAs pose the riskof a considerable increase in consumer spendingwhich could have an inflationary impact? Is therenot, therefore, a great opportunity to examinepump priming pension cover, particularly for thelower paid who took the opportunity to partici-pate in the savings scheme?

Mr. Cowen: Tax relief for pension contri-butions is not unlimited. Relief on contributionsto personal pensions and PRSAs is limited to acertain percentage of remuneration which riseswith age, 15% to 30% for age 50 years and above.The employer contribution to PRSAs is aggre-gated with the employee contribution for the pur-poses of tax relief limits.

With regard to occupational pensions, whererelief for employee contributions, includingadditional voluntary contributions, AVCs, is lim-ited to an age related scale of 15% to 30% ofearnings, there is no monetary or percentage limitin respect of relief given for employer contri-butions. The limitation on the employer contri-bution is by reference to actuarial guidelines inmeeting funding requirements for the maximumpension of two thirds of final salary. This meansthat, unlike personal pensions where the controlis on the relief given, the control here lies in thelimitation of benefits paid. Furthermore, relief foremployee contributions and contributions to per-sonal pensions is capped at an earnings figure of\254,000.

Pension coverage is an issue that must be keptunder review. The policy response must meet thechallenge that confronts us. The CSO survey onpension coverage reveals that the coverage ratefor persons in employment in the first quarter of2004 was 52.4%. It has indicated it will completeits full survey of pension coverage towards theend of this year and it expects it to be publishedin the first half of 2006. The Pensions Board isalso doing some work on this which might wellbe available in the middle of this year.

With regard to SSIA account holders, legis-lation on PRSAs was introduced in 2002. It wouldbe desirable to monitor the up-take of theseaccounts before considering the need for incen-tives such as eliminating exit tax for SSIA fundswhich are eventually transferred to PRSAs.

Mr. Bruton: The Minister said during the weekthat Fianna Fail is the best party for the working


man. However, the truth is that many workingmen do not have pension cover. The Ministermust accept that there is an urgent case forenhancing the incentives to ordinary earners toget pension cover. At present, there is almostthree times the incentive for people on highincome to contribute to pensions than for peopleon low income. There is no justice in that. Wouldthe Minister not take a more urgent approachthan talking about long-term reviews and confirmthat this is a priority and that he intends totackle it?

Mr. Cowen: The Pensions Board is due toreport in mid-year on pensions coverage. That isnot a long-term review.

Mr. Bruton: The Minister did not indicate thathe would act on it.

Mr. Cowen: Obviously, I must wait to see whatis in the report. If the Deputy knows what is inthe report already, he has an advantage. The Pen-sions Board, which has a statutory remit in thisarea, is addressing this issue. It will come forwardwith ideas and recommendations as a result of thework it is doing.

With regard to what will happen with the SSIAscheme, we are monitoring that situation. I do notwish to indicate at this remove what, if any,response there will be from Government. It isbetter to monitor the situation. Obviously, I amexamining the issue but it is not an issue on whichthe Government has come to a firm view.

Financial Services Regulation.

2. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Finance ifhe has plans to extend the remit of the IFSRAor the Central Bank to regulate companies whichadvance money from their own resources securedon assets such as property, especially in view ofthe fact that the advisory group on this sectorrecommended in 1999 that such businesses beregulated and in view of the reported extensiveactivities of a company (details supplied); and ifhe will make a statement on the matter.[7296/05]

Mr. Cowen: All financial service providers thatprovide loans secured on a person’s principalprivate residence are subject to the provisions ofPart IX of the Consumer Credit Act. This is as aresult of an amendment to the Act made lastyear, following consideration of a recommend-ation in the 1999 McDowell report.

The Consumer Credit Act is the principalsource of protection to personal borrowers. TheAct subjects all lenders who provide finance onthe security of the family home to a range of obli-gations. These include: provision of a written loanagreement, quoting the APR and any other feesthat will be charged; a requirement to warn theborrower about the risk of losing their home; andan obligation to put mortgage protectioninsurance in place. Apart from the special case of

the family home, the Act does not apply where aloan is given for a commercial purpose.

There is no statutory oversight of interest ratesexcept for the special case of moneylenders whocome within the scope of Part VIII of the Con-sumer Credit Act. This special category of lendertypically provides short-term loans to poor creditrisks at very high APRs. Such lenders arerequired to hold a moneylender’s licence and thefinancial regulator can refuse to grant such alicence on the grounds that the cost of credit isexcessive. The requirement to hold such a licenceand the corresponding oversight of interest ratesonly applies to this specialist category of lender.

The financial regulator already has the powerunder the Consumer Credit Act to give directionsto a mortgage lender about misleading advertis-ing as well as to prosecute for breaches of theAct. In addition, under the legislation estab-lishing the regulator, its consumer director hasresponsibility for monitoring the provision of fin-ancial services to consumers generally and has thepower to require a provider of such services tofurnish information relevant to any inquiry orstudy that the director chooses to undertake.

I am at present consulting the Financial Ser-vices Ombudsman Council about the financialservice providers not regulated by the financialregulator that should be brought within the scopeof the Financial Services Ombudsman, when theombudsman commences operations on 1 April.The ombudsman has extensive powers to provideredress to consumers who have been unfairlytreated by a financial service provider. Subject tothe views of the council, I can see merit in includ-ing those mortgage lenders who provide loanssecured on a person’s principal residence.

Criminal activity, including money-laundering,by financial service providers or any other per-sons is governed by criminal justice legislation.This is enforced by the Garda Sıochana and theCriminal Assets Bureau. All entities whose pri-mary business is lending are subject to the knowyour customer, reporting and other obligationsunder money-laundering legislation. Their pro-fessional advisers, such as accountants and solici-tors, are also subject to these reporting require-ments. All companies are subject to the enhancedcompany law regime that has been put in place inrecent years, including the oversight role of theDirector of Corporate Enforcement. The finan-cial regulator’s role regarding compliance byregulated institutions with money laundering, taxand company law is purely supportive.

Ms Burton: Does the Minister agree that thistype of company should be fully regulated byIFSRA and, therefore, the remit of the authorityshould be extended to cover this type of com-pany? I do not know if the Minister shares theshock of most people who heard reference to acompany, Chesterton Finance, in media reportsconcerning Garda investigations into money laun-dering and the provisional IRA and other para-militaries. I received the same reply as the Mini-


[Ms Burton.]ster from the Director of Consumer Affairs inregard to Part IX of the Consumer Credit Act1995. Does the Minister think this sufficient? Forexample, a prominent partner in one of the larg-est accountancy practices was offering potentialinvestors in this company 10% returns, wellabove ordinary interest rates and, therefore,attractive in the context of the potential formoney lending.

Does the Minister know how many such enti-ties are unregulated? Does he know the amountof lending which may be undertaken by suchcompanies? Such companies have had dubiousreputations in the past, particularly where theyhave lent money on the security of land, generallylending about half the value of the land whichthey hold as a mortgage. The Minister may beaware that these companies also apply stringentterms and conditions and high interest rates onthe loans they provide. Does the Minister sharethe view of the McDowell committee in 1999 thatsuch entities should be regulated? While the orig-inal plan was that regulation of IFSRA was tooperate through the Department of Enterprise,Trade and Employment, once it came into theambit of the Central Bank and the Departmentof Finance, this appears to have been blocked.Will the Minister comment on this matter?

Mr. Cowen: The specific information theDeputy seeks on the amount that can be bor-rowed and the numbers of institutions involved isnot immediately available to me but I will makeit available to her. With regard to the point oncompanies linked to money laundering and theallegations in regard to IRA criminal activity, themain purpose of the financial regulator’s super-vision of financial services providers is the stab-ility of the financial system and the protection ofindividuals who entrust financial institutions withtheir money. While the financial regulator has ageneral obligation to support other State agenciessuch as the Garda and the Revenue Commis-sioners by providing them with reports on rel-evant matters which come to its attention in thecourse of its activities, this role is a supportiveone.

The Criminal Justice Act 1994, as amended,provides, among other things, for the offence inlaw of money laundering and includes measuresto counteract money laundering, which includesthe concealment, disguise, conversion, transfer orremoval from the State of any property, includingmoney, which is or represents the proceeds ofcriminal activity. The obligation of clients of fin-ancial institutions in general therefore appliesalso to non-deposit-taking mortgage lenders. Theobligations also apply to auditors, accountants,tax advisers and lawyers. The financial regulatoris even obliged to report any suspicions it mayform in regard to a body supervised by it to com-ply with the identification, records and reportingrequirements.

The office of the financial services ombudsman,which commences operation on 1 April, will haveextensive powers to investigate complaints andorder redress where a customer has been unfairlytreated, and such redress could include a direc-tion to change a practice complained of andaward financial compensation. This is the avenuewe should explore and on which I hope to makedecisions before 1 April.

Ms Burton: That does not answer the point thatthis area is not regulated by IFSRA. We have setup an expensive and extensive regulation model.However, a letter in my possession from theDirector of Consumer Affairs indicates that theonly powers of oversight that exist are in regardto the Consumer Credit Act 1995. Will the Mini-ster agree to extend the powers of IFSRA specifi-cally to cover this area, as recommended in theMcDowell report?

Mr. Cowen: The question arises whether weshould apply it to those bodies which do not takemoney deposits as part of their operations. As Istated, the financial services ombudsman councilmay well be the best avenue in this regard. Wewill consider the matter in that context.

PEACE II Programme.

3. Caoimhghın O Caolain asked the Ministerfor Finance if he will report on progress to dateat EU level to secure the extension of thePEACE II programme until 2006; if he has alsopressed for a successor programme or prog-rammes, that is, PEACE III, to build on theachievements of PEACE II; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7385/05]

Mr. Cowen: The Government is aware of thevaluable role the PEACE II programme hasplayed in building peace and reconciliation inNorthern Ireland and the Border region and thatthere continues to be a need for such funding.Therefore, I am glad to report that we haverecently secured an extension of the PEACEprogramme to 2006. The extension has beenadopted on foot of the conclusions of the Headsof State meeting in June 2004 which, respondingto a joint initiative by the two Prime Ministersconcerned, the Taoiseach and British Prime Mini-ster, invited the Commission to examine thepossibility of extending the programme to 2006.It was approved by the European Parliament on14 January 2005 and by Council on 24 January2005.

The operational programme detailing thepriorities and measures for the extended prog-ramme was submitted to the Commission on 11February 2005 jointly by my Department and theDepartment of Finance and Personnel in theNorth. The submission took account of an exten-sive public consultation carried out last summerby the special EU programmes body which man-ages the programme. There was a very goodresponse to this consultation, including more than


70 written responses and a wide attendance atpublic meetings. This shows the high level ofpublic engagement with the PEACE IIprogramme.

Although the extension of the programme wasagreed only five weeks ago, we are already turn-ing our attention to the post-2006 situation.Under the terms of the programme agreed,spending may continue up to 2008. The questionof what will happen when the extension runs outis one which will have to be reviewed by the twoGovernments in consultation with the EuropeanCommission. This is under active considerationat present.

Caoimhghın O Caolain: I welcome the goodprogress made and the confirmation that theEuropean Parliament has formally ratified theextension of PEACE II to 2006. The programmeis very important for communities in the Bordercounties and the Six Counties which still experi-ence, as we all recognise, the legacy of partition,conflict and neglect over decades. The previousMinister stated in reply to a question from me onthis issue last year that a new programme beyond2006 would be considered in due course. WhileI note what the Minister has just stated on theconsideration of this matter by the Irish and Brit-ish Governments, is it also being addressed at EUlevel? Will the Minister be more specific in thisregard?

We addressed the Taoiseach yesterday on theabsence of infrastructural investment in theBorder counties as part of the overall Border,midlands and west region. Does the Ministeraccept that the supports under PEACE II shouldat all times be in addition to and not substitutesfor normal State investment in regard to infras-tructural development or other initiatives thatcome under the ambit of the PEACE II prog-ramme and, it is to be hoped, a PEACE III prog-ramme which will follow?

I understand concerns have been raised thatwhile training for women in the child care sectorwas funded under PEACE II, this may not becontinued under the extension to 2006. I am notprivy to the detail of this matter. Is the Ministeraware of the concerns raised and can he providefurther information in this area?

Mr. Cowen: An extension to the end of 2006will bring the programme in line with other Struc-tural Funds programmes. Therefore, a newPEACE III programme could not be sought untilthen. Both Governments wanted to ensure that agap period did not occur and, therefore, an exten-sion rather than a new programme was sought atthat stage. The question of whether there will bea PEACE III programme will be considered inthe context of the budget discussions for 2007-13,financial perspectives which are being discussedin respect of all programmes and policies there-after. What we were doing here was to make surethat this programme which was due to end lastyear was extended to bring it in line with other

structural funds programmes so that one couldmake the argument thereafter.

Regarding the funding arrangements, the totalfund of \707 million, including Exchequer andother matching funds, has been made available toprojects in Northern Ireland and the six Bordercounties in PEACE II between 2000 and the endof 2004. The EU contribution was \531 million,with a ratio of 80:20, four to one respectivelybetween North and South. The Border region hasreceived \106 million in Structural Funds, anaverage of about \21 million annually, plusadditional Exchequer support of \35 million overthe five years. Under the terms of the prog-ramme, 15% of total funding was allocated forpromoting and supporting cross-Border activity.The amount available, including the maximumfunding in 2005, totals \80 million. This breaksdown to \56 million to Northern Ireland and \24million to the Border region. These are indepen-dent of or in addition to the national develop-ment plan programme rolling out the regionaldevelopment objectives of the BMW region.

As regards the specifics on the opportunitiesfor women, I have not got the information avail-able as to whether that is covered in the childcare sector of the extended PEACE IIprogramme.

Caoimhghın O Caolain: I would be grateful ifthe Minister would be good enough to come backto me when he establishes the position because itis a matter of concern whether the extension ofthe PEACE II programme also covers women inthe child care sector in terms of what is appliedheretofore.

Am I to understand from the Minister’s replythat we are now looking at both Governmentsaddressing what might apply post-2006 and thatthere is not yet an EU dimension to what mightthen come into play? Will the Minister be morespecific in that area?

Is the Minister familiar with the report entitledBuilding on Peace: Supporting Peace and Recon-ciliation after 2006, which was produced by a con-sortium of cross-Border bodies based at Euro-pean House in my home town of Monaghan? Ifthe Minister is not familiar with it, I commend itto him. It is an excellent case for a PEACE IIIprogramme and I hope it is being factored intothe consideration of both administrations indeciding what is to happen from 2007 onwards.

In recognition of the important role thatPEACE I and PEACE II have played, I ask theMinister to affirm his commitment and that of theGovernment to advance to a PEACE III prog-ramme. That is very important for those counties.

Mr. Cowen: The extension proposal containsEuropean agricultural guidelines as regards thefund and financial instruments for fisheries guid-ance funding, increased funding for and focus onreconciliation, more capacity building for groupssuch as ethnic minorities and Protestant workingclass communities, continued focus on economic


[Mr. Cowen.]and social projects, specific tourism measures anda continued focus on cross-Border co-operation.This is all as a result of the public consultationprocess.

My reading of the final part of the draft asrecently delivered by Minister Pearson inNorthern Ireland on Monday, 7 March, is that itwould send a clear signal that the current exten-sion of the PEACE II programme would com-plete the work and that there might not, there-fore, be a successor programme. Our view is thatin advance of sending such signals there shouldfirst be proper consultations with the stake-holders and given the political aspects of thequestions, we imagine these consultations shouldtake the form of Government to Government dis-cussions, and that the views of the EuropeanCommission should be sought.

It also highlights the point that successful con-clusions to the Peace process would be the bestway of maintaining the extra goodwill we havehad up to now regarding this programme, andeveryone should take up that responsibility.

Tax Code.

4. Mr. P. McGrath asked the Minister for Fin-ance if he has satisfied himself that the tax treat-ment of different categories of parents with chil-dren takes proper account of the financialpressures on them; and if he has plans to addressthis aspect of the tax code. [7437/05]

Mr. Cowen: I assume what the Deputy mainlyhas in mind is support through the tax system forchild care. The Government’s policy is that childbenefit is the main instrument through which sup-port is provided for parents with children. Oneof the main advantages of this approach is thatwhereas tax relief would be of little or no benefitto those with low incomes, the provision of sup-port for parents through the child benefit routemeans equality of treatment for all recipients.

The Government has substantially increasedchild benefit since coming into office in 1997.Overall expenditure on child benefit hasincreased by 279% from \506 million when theGovernment came into office in 1997 to an esti-mated \1,916 million in 2005. On the supply side,the provision of formal child care places is beingstimulated through a programme of investmentunder the national development plan equalopportunities childcare programme, about whichthere were further announcements today. Overthe next five years, about 17,000 places areexpected to be created under this programme.The Government has also undertaken measuresto favour the supply of child care by tax incen-tives to set up facilities and relief from benefit-in-kind taxation for free or subsidised child carewhere this is provided by employers. Takentogether, these represent substantial measures toassist with the cost of child care.

In addition, the tax system treats parents withdependent children more favourably than persons

with no dependent children, in recognition of theadditional financial burden associated withparenthood. This is done mainly through the oneparent family tax credit, the widowed parent taxcredit, the incapacitated child tax credit and thehome carer tax credit. Persons who qualify for theone parent family tax credit, including widowedparents, qualify for the associated standard rateband cut-off point which is \33,400 in 2005. Thisis \4,000 greater than that which applies for a sin-gle person.

Mr. P. McGrath: Since the Minister has indi-cated that child care assistance is through thechild benefit system, is he aware that child carecosts in the provinces are approaching \150weekly and \200 weekly in the city, while childbenefit is no more than \130 monthly? How canthis be a measure to help with child care if themoney falls so far short?

The Minister said in his reply that equality oftreatment for all is important. How can he saythere is equality of treatment? For example, sep-arated parents of a child get four times the taxcredit anyone else would get. A married coupleliving together gets the double allowance, themarried couple’s allowance, while an unmarriedcouple living together gets the single allowance.How can the Minister say the system is promotingequality while a separated couple, be they mar-ried or a couple who have just separated, getsfour times the tax credit given to an unmarriedcouple living together?

The Minister mentioned the spouse’s homecarer’s allowance. That has not increased in valuesince it was introduced and remains at \770 perannum. It affects couples where one spouse staysat home. Such couples are severely discriminatedagainst under the tax code. They attract the toprate of tax when their annual income reaches\38,000. If their income is greater than that theypay a lot more in tax than a couple with onespouse going out to work. Does the Ministeragree it is time those issues were addressed?

Mr. Cowen: As I said, since this Governmentcame to office in 1997 child care benefit hasincreased by nine times the rate of inflation dur-ing the period. That is a fair indication of theeffort being made. It is always a question ofresources. Clearly, child benefit does not defrayall family child care costs, nor was it designed todo so. It was, however, recognised as being prob-ably the best mechanism by which support wouldbe provided for families. It was not meant todefray the total costs of family requirements butwould certainly be of some assistance to them.The fact of the benefit increasing at a rate of ninetimes more than the consumer price index is afair indication that the policy of the Governmenthas been to use that benefit as a means of provid-ing some assistance in these circumstances.

The home care tax credit, which is \770 perannum and may be claimed by a jointly assessedmarried couple where one spouse remains in the


home to care for one or more dependants, wasnot increased in the budget but was the only cre-dit that was not increased. The one-parent family,widowed parent and incapacitated child tax cred-its were increased. The Deputy is entitled to high-light the only one that was not increased but I amentitled to mention the other increases. The homecare tax credit was introduced in the Finance Act2000 and was designed to recognise the contri-bution made by a spouse who remains working inthe home. The provision is intended to assist incases where a spouse has forfeited a secondincome to care for dependants in the home.

4 o’clock

The Deputy asked why double income marriedcouples get nothing extra through the tax code inrespect of their children. It is a question of tar-

geting resources. Under Governmentpolicy, the main instrument throughwhich the State provides support for

parents with children is the child benefit system.Expenditure on it is more than \1.9 billion, whichis a not inconsiderable amount. I have no plansto move away from that approach but we willkeep the issue under review.

Mr. F. McGrath: The Minister has notdelivered.

Mr. P. McGrath: The focus of the Minister’sattention on child care is the child benefit systembut that does not provide adequate help to allevi-ate financial pressure on married couples. Manypeople pay an amount for child care equivalentto their mortgage repayment each month. It is asignificant burden on young working couples whohave managed to purchase a house and who aretrying to rear children. Does the Minister concedehis efforts through the child benefit system areinadequate and do not meet the needs of youngcouples and that he must refocus his attention onothers method to help them with child care costs?

Mr. Cowen: The matter is kept under review.It is a challenge to the system to see what way wecan do this but every Member accepts that usinga tax credit for child care has a significant dis-criminatory effect against low income couples.

Mr. P. McGrath: There are ways around that.

Mr. Cowen: One can devise a range ofmeasures but it is a question of targetingresources. We have trebled that resource sincecoming into office from \531 million to \1.9billion, which represents a considerable transferof funds to this area. An extra \1.3 billion is goinginto the child benefit system. Progress is beingmade and those who have problems with it haveyet to come up with alternatives.

Mr. F. McGrath: The Minister is losing thou-sands of workers.

Mr. Cowen: The Deputy should keep an eye onthe four seater. He has enough on his own platerather than worrying about me.

Mr. F. McGrath: I am safe enough.

Fiscal Policy.

5. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Finance ifhe will make a statement on his address to thelunch of Financial Services Ireland on 21February 2005, particularly his reported state-ment that the compensation bill arising from theSupreme Court decision on the Health(Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2004 would result inlower spending elsewhere; the anticipatedamount by which spending will have to bereduced; and if specific areas have been identifiedfor such reduction. [7297/05]

Mr. Cowen: The Supreme Court decision onthe Health (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill has signifi-cant expenditure implications. The issue of repay-ing the money has been referred to a specialCabinet sub-committee comprising theTaoiseach, the Tanaiste, the Attorney Generaland myself.

The Revised Estimates Volume, which Irecently published, provides for a 13% increasein estimated health expenditure in 2005. Repay-ments will be made from the Health ServiceExecutive Vote and, as made clear in the recentRevised Estimates Volume, a SupplementaryEstimate will be brought forward for the costsarising in 2005 on foot of the recent SupremeCourt decision. There will be no cutbacks in theEstimate for the health services this year or inother departmental Estimates to pay for this Sup-plementary Estimate.

Given the number of people involved and thecomplexity in calculating the repayments due, itis likely that the repayment of moneys will taketime. Claims falling for payment after 2005 willbe a charge on the Vote for subsequent years andthe required funding will be accommodatedwithin the overall spending plans for those years.

Ms Burton: Is the Minister aware of theTanaiste and Minister for Health and Children’sstatement earlier that she has been advised300,000 people affected by the Supreme Courtruling are likely to claim? Has the Minister esti-mated the cost of these claims? He commentedon 21 February that the cost would be approxi-mately \500 million. However, the Tanaiste andMinister for Health and Children’s statementindicates a much higher figure of between \1billion and \3 billion. Has the Minister had anopportunity to examine the costing? He statedprior to the Financial Services Ireland lunch thatthe Supreme Court ruling would result in lowerspending elsewhere in the health service. He con-tradicted himself in his reply in regard to 2005 bystating he will introduce a Supplementary Esti-mate. I would like him to reconcile those state-ments. Has he identified the areas in which therewill be lower spending? When is that likely tooccur?

91 Other 3 March 2005. Questions 92

Mr. Cowen: I am glad to clarify that I nevermade those comments. The Deputy has referredto an inaccurate interpretation of what I said,which related to questions I was asked prior tothe lunch referred to by the Deputy. I stated theblindingly obvious. I was asked who pays for it;the taxpayer pays. I was asked what impact thiswould have on future spending; I replied that theamount to pay for this could have been used inother areas. That was interpreted subsequently asa statement about specific cuts, which were nevermentioned. I made four attempts to have it cor-rected and it was finally reasonably well correctedby the following day. People have the tapes. Itwas an incorrect interpretation. I was asked aquestion and I stated the blindingly obvious. Inever mentioned a figure on this matter becauseI do not know what the figure is nor does theDepartment. That will not be known until onetries to quantify what is involved. People canmake guesstimates but I have no intention ofdoing so.

In addition, a number of families may not claimrefunds because they were happy with the serviceprovided and do not have a problem.

Mr. P. McGrath: There will not be too many.

Mr. Cowen: The Deputy will be surprised.

Mr. P. McGrath: Few people will look a gifthorse in the mouth and turn back.

Mr. Cowen: A number of people commentedon radio in the aftermath of the Supreme Courtruling that they had no intention of claiming. I donot suggest how many will do so but families willcome to their own conclusions as to whether theywish to claim. I am not commenting on whetherthey should but some people are happy with theservice and may not claim. I know people whofeel that way about it.

Mr. P. McGrath: I also know people who arehappy with the service but I do not know thatthey will look a gift horse in the mouth.

Mr. Cowen: Those who are entitled to claimwill be paid. We will seek to devise as expeditiousa way as possible of providing for what is due tothem. We are still considering this at Cabinetbased on legal advice and decisions must be takenon the logistics involved.

Ms Burton: Does the Minister accept theTanaiste and Minister for Health and Children’sstatement earlier that there are 300,000 potentialclaimants? If so, does he agree the sum involved,regardless of whether everybody claims, will besignificantly higher than first estimated? Hestated this will have an impact on health spend-ing. Has he identified the areas on which therewill be an impact, particularly since a significantlyhigher number of claimants is involved?

In the context of the trolleys and the accidentand emergency disaster, many people are con-

cerned about the implications of the Minister’sstatement of 21 March for health services.

Mr. Cowen: The purpose of Question Time isto clarify those situations, and despite my clari-fication, the Deputy is seeking to continue mis-representing my position. It was stated in thisHouse by the Tanaiste, confirmed by me in aninterview when attending the ECOFIN meetingthe week before the interview to which theDeputy referred and has been made clear by theGovernment that we will introduce a Supplemen-tary Estimate regarding that matter this year. ASupplementary Estimate does not impact on thecurrent Revised Estimates Volume which hasbeen published.

Ms Burton: For 2005.

Mr. Cowen: That is the position, and when Iam asked about this situation, I presume thatpeople have taken on board the clear Govern-ment position stated by the Tanaiste in thisHouse last week. I was asked the following weekwho pays for it; the taxpayer does. I said that theimpact would be as follows. Whatever liability theState is deemed to owe families, estates or peoplewho are still alive, we will pay according to thelaw and the money will be diverted from otherpurposes. That much is a statement of the blind-ingly obvious. That was the generality of thestatement; no more specifics were involved. Itwas subsequently interpreted in the way that theDeputy has suggested, and as I have said, that isnot my position. Neither did I state that on thatoccasion or any other.

Regarding the question of Estimates, as I havesaid, only guesstimates have been mentioned onthis matter hitherto. We are not able to estimateaccurately what it would mean. Regarding the fig-ure that the Tanaiste mentioned yesterday, if theDeputy counts back over the period, she will seethat the numbers of people who have comethrough the system are estimated, according tothe figures that I saw, at approximately 275,000.What amount will be due to any of those peopleis a matter still to be decided based on legaladvice and is being considered by the Govern-ment. That is the exact overall situation, andthere is no other. Further Supplementary Esti-mates or payments beyond this year will be takenin the normal course of events based on theresources available. As the Deputy is aware, inmy Budget Statement I estimated 5% growth inthe economy this year.

Other Questions.

————

Banking Sector Regulation.

6. Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Ministerfor Finance the number of persons, companiesand trusts being investigated by the RevenueCommissioners arising from the Clerical Medical


Insurance-NIB inquiry at the latest date for whichfigures are available; the number of cases inwhich settlements have been agreed; the amountpaid; the number of cases outstanding; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7187/05]

Mr. Cowen: I am informed by the RevenueCommissioners that arising from the ClericalMedical Insurance-NIB inquiry, 466 cases havebeen targeted for investigation. To date, 297 caseshave been settled on payment of tax, interest andpenalties amounting to a total of \49.51 million.A further 116 cases have been finalised with noadditional liability arising. The remaining 53 casesare the subject of ongoing investigation, inrespect of which \4.38 million has been paid onaccount.

In the course of 2003, three cases were pros-ecuted, with fines being imposed in two cases anda suspended sentence imposed in the other. Theindividuals concerned have also settled their taxaffairs and paid the outstanding tax together withinterest and penalties. A further case is underinvestigation with a view to prosecution.

Aggregate results of the ongoing investigationshave been published each year since 1998 in theannual reports of the Revenue Commissioners.Individual details of settlements have also beenpublished where the provisions of section 1086 ofthe Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 applied.

Ms Burton: Given the increase in cases iden-tified compared with previous answers — it nowstands at 466 as opposed to 452 and there are now53 cases not yet dealt with — will the Ministerreconsider his proposal in yesterday’s discussionon the Finance Bill effectively to dilute the pro-visions that he promised to introduce in the Billregarding those who aid and abet tax evasion? Inparticular, does the Minister agree with state-ments by Mr. Daly, the Chairman of the RevenueCommissioners, that not only is a tightening upof the aiding and abetting offence required, weshould also have a clear reference to puttingmoney offshore? That is the net point where theRevenue cannot successfully prosecute. TheMinister has himself stated that in 2003 only threeprosecutions took place, two of which resulted infines. Compare that with a person who defraudssocial welfare, is prosecuted and receives a sen-tence or suspended sentence. Will the Ministerreconsider his proposed amendment on ReportStage to dilute the aiding and abetting offence inthis year’s Finance Bill?

Mr. Cowen: I find that most unfortunate, and Iask people and the press to check the record ofthe House yesterday regarding the CommitteeStage of the Finance Bill. In an effort to makesome sort of political point, presumably in thecontext of the by-election campaign, the Deputyhas continually misrepresented my position. Thatis the second successive such question from theDeputy. She was listening to me very intently yes-terday in committee, but she has sought to mis-represent my position, and I find it most unfortu-

nate. The purpose of Question Time is to clarifymatters and provide factual information to theHouse on any matter that any Deputy wishes toraise with me, something that I gladly do. I findit unfortunate to have to come back with a replythat has to retrieve a situation after inaccurateand untrue assertions made by the Deputy inher question.

There is no question of diluting the aiding andabetting section. What is involved, as is the nor-mal course in such matters, is ensuring that wehave sufficient clarity and understanding on thepart of everyone involved, including the RevenueCommissioners, the taxpayers, tax advisers, theLaw Society and accountancy bodies, and thatthey all understand precisely what the extensionof section 1078 of the Taxes Consolidation Act1997 involves. The problem hitherto has beenthat one could prosecute only on the basis of pro-viding or assisting in providing incorrect infor-mation on a tax return. We are broadening thatto try to ensure that in future — prospectively,since to do so retrospectively is unconstitutional— where there has been a direction, policy orpractice not by those on the front line andaccountable but by others higher up in manage-ment, they will be amenable to prosecutionthrough the creation of the new offence createdby the Finance Bill 2005.

I made it very clear on the basis of legitimatequestions asked by Deputy Bruton that there wasno question of any dilution involved. It wasmatter of clarifying the extent and extension ofthe existing range of offences available. I alsomade it clear in our discussion with DeputyBurton in committee that the wording being usedcovers the specific situation raised by the Chair-man of the Revenue Commissioners and that thefacilitating of fraudulent tax evasion covers thespecifics that she mentioned, recognising that put-ting money offshore is not in itself an offence.Doing so without notifying the Revenue is theoffence. I made it very clear in our discussions onwhat I did in section 133 of the Finance Bill thatthe issue in question is covered.

I have no problem, and the Deputy is quiteentitled to put her point of view if it is different.However, I ask her, in the interests of fairnessand accuracy, to desist from seeking to misrep-resent my position, which is quite clear.

Mr. Boyle: In light of the recent takeover ofNational Irish Bank by Danske Bank, is the Mini-ster confident, with the change of ownership andwhatever alteration in management might havetaken place since, that corporate responsibilityfor the malfeasance that occurred in that bankwill be properly prosecuted and that individualsin the new company will not slip through the net?

Mr. Cowen: As is normal regarding the law onmergers or takeovers, existing liabilities of thebank remain current. People can still sue in theevent of malfeasance against them under the aus-pices of the National Irish Bank. People buy both


[Mr. Cowen.]the assets and the concurrent liabilities of busi-nesses when they acquire them. As I understandit there is no question of a person’s right to sueor to claim recompense for any wrongdoingregarding any of these matters being put at riskas a result of the acquisition taking place.

Ms Burton: May I ask a brief supplementary?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We are over time.The Deputy must be very brief.

Ms Burton: Will the Minister explain thereason for the increase in the number of casesunder investigation from 452, the number he gaveme on 1 February, to 466, an increase of 14? Willhe explain also the increase from 40 to 53 of theunsettled cases he indicated in earlier replies arelikely to be the ones which involved tax evasionand the possible commission of offences?

Mr. Cowen: I understand from my note thatthe number of cases under investigation hasincreased from 452 to 466, an increase of 14, as aresult of some supplementary information pro-vided by NIB during the final clean-up phase ofthe investigation.

Tax Yield.

7. Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Financethe total tax generated from the motor sector in2002, 2003 and 2004; the main components of taxraised from that sector; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7172/05]

Mr. Cowen: I am informed by the RevenueCommissioners that the relevant informationavailable is the amount of tax revenues collectedas VAT, excise and VRT in respect of motorvehicles. As regards VAT, all figures are esti-mates as the information to be furnished on VATreturns does not require the yield from particularsectors of trade to be identified. It is not possibleto quantify corporation tax or income tax dataseparately for the motor industry.

In 2004, the provisional tax revenue was \3,752million. This was comprised of VAT on a range ofcommodities including mineral oils, vehicle sales,other motor-related products and services of \962million; mineral oil tax in respect of petrol, dieseland LPG of \1,845 million; and VRT of \946million. In 2003, the tax revenue in respect of themotor sector was \3,256 million comprising VATof \880 million; mineral oil tax of \1,557 million;and VRT of \819 million. In 2002, the tax rev-enue was \3,167 million comprising VAT of \860million; mineral oil tax of \1,514 million; andVRT of \793 million.

In respect of annual motor tax, I am advised bythe Department of the Environment, Heritageand Local Government that revenue from motortax was \747 million in 2004, \680 million in 2003and \539 million in 2002. As the figures illustrate,the tax raised from the motor sector is animportant component of the overall tax take. It is

a matter for Government as to how taxes acrossthe different tax heads are raised. The Govern-ment has prioritised tax reductions on incomeearned by employees, in preference to otherareas, and this policy has helped create recordemployment levels. The Deputy might wish tonote that I did not increase VRT, VAT or exciserates on petrol or diesel in this year’s budget.Consequently, increasing tax revenues arisingfrom car sales to date in 2005 is a function ofincreased sales and, in some cases, higher pricesbut not higher tax rates.

Mr. Bruton: Will the Minister agree thatmotorists have become something of a soft tar-get? To put a car on the road now, the averagetax contribution is over \2,500 and as the Mini-ster’s reply has revealed, that contribution isgrowing rapidly. Will the Minister accept it istime to reassess the extent to which we dependon this type of expenditure tax on what is formany people a necessity in terms of their liveli-hood? Does he sense that this huge growth in taxin this area, which the Minister seldom adverts to— the concentration is exclusively on what Ibelieve he said yesterday was a \4 a weekreduction in income tax that he secured——

Mr. Cowen: No, it is not. The Deputy is nottelling the whole story.

Mr. Bruton: The amount a person has to payon his or her motor tax is far more than the \4 aweek reduction of which the Minister is so proud.The real issue for the Minister is that tax in thisarea has doubled in the past seven years, andspending has doubled to match, but what frus-trates many people is that they do not see thedelivery in the health service and the quality offootpaths, roads or public transport. There is aserious issue in that there are soft targets in theMinister’s tax approach and he is not deliveringvalue for money. People are getting frustratedwith that combination, as frustrated as the Mini-ster’s predecessor who must have thought therewas a boiler in the Custom House burning moneyit was absorbing so much.

Mr. Cowen: I am glad to have the opportunityto record the achievement of which I am so proudbecause Deputy Bruton likes to hear only the firstpart of the sentence and shout down the secondpart. A total of \220 less in tax is being paid bythe average industrial wage earner this year com-pared with 1997, while his or her wage hasincreased by \11,000. Instead of an averageindustrial wage of \19,000 when the coalitionGovernment was in office, the average industrialwage now is over \30,000. Despite the fact thathis or her wages have risen by \11,000 per year,they are actually paying \220 less in income tax.That is what I am proud of and that is not a dif-ference of \4 per week. I am glad to clarify thatpoint so that we do not continue with the misap-prehension that I am proud of a change of just \4.


The second point made by the Deputy relatesto this basic choice. The Deputy wants to be afriend to the motorist and seek to review this areawith a view to indicating to the public that he willreduce these taxes, despite the fact that a functionof these increases has been the buoyancy invehicle sales. We know all about that from ourown experience in terms of the numbers of carson the road over the past ten years and what isestimated to continue to rise. The level of carownership in this country is very high. If theDeputy wants to do that he will have to ask thepublic from where will we get our taxes.

By taking the decision to keep taxes low onincome we have far better prospects of increasingjob creation and the numbers of wage earnerswho will contribute to the buoyant revenues ofthe economy. We believe the model of taxationunder the various tax heads is probably the bestone as we see it. Others might disagree but if theywant to change it, they should tell the public thefull story. If they reduce it in one phase, wherewill they increase it because we cannot try to be afriend to everybody and leave things as they are?

I do not accept that we are not seeing animprovement. The national development plan isbeing rolled out. For example, if one travels onthe N2 today one can see the amount of worktaking place on the Ashbourne Road, which hap-pens to be in Meath — with the by-election wemight as well be topical.

Ms Burton: There are no buses on the road.The Minister should try to get a bus or ask hiscolleague, the Minister for Transport, if he canget one. He might not suffer from car sicknessthen.

Mr. Cowen: I knew that would prompt DeputyBurton to seek to shout me down. There areabout 17 machines on the road and another 20 or30 are due to come on to it. As soon as that roadis completed, we will move on to the N3. Thechambers of commerce in the Meath constituencymade it clear in committees — I hope membersof the press were in a position to attend — whothey regard as the strongest proponents of thenecessity for the N3 to go ahead. They werethankful of the consistent position of the FiannaFail Deputies in their constituencies as distinctfrom manoeuvres being made by others who havenow finally recognised that over 80% of the con-stituents of Meath want to see that road go aheadas quickly as possible.

Capital Projects.

8. Mr. Coveney asked the Minister for Financeif he is satisfied with the effectiveness of the pro-cess whereby different funding options are beingassessed for capital projects; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7134/05]

Mr. Cowen: The responsibility for capital pro-ject selection and choosing the optimal means offunding such projects rests with the agencies

sponsoring and sanctioning such projects. Nor-mally the sanctioning authority will be a Depart-ment. I am determined to ensure that value formoney for the taxpayer is maximised in the exer-cise of this responsibility. Accordingly, Depart-ments and implementing agencies, in decidingprojects and funding, must operate within the fin-ancial framework of the five-year multi-annualcapital envelopes as approved by the Govern-ment in the context of the annual budget andwithin the appraisal and procurement frameworkas set out in my Department’s capital appraisalguidelines, interim PPP guidance and procure-ment guidance.

Under the general conditions of sanction forthe multi-annual capital envelopes introduced inbudget 2004, Departments are required to complyin all cases with my Department’s guidelines forthe appraisal and management of capital projects,the interim PPP guidance from my Departmentand observe the rules on procurement. RevisedDepartment of Finance guidelines for theappraisal and management of capital expenditureproposals in the public sector were published inFebruary and circulated to Departments andagencies for implementation.

To assist State authorities in determining theoptimal means of financing public investmentprojects, the Government established theNational Development Finance Agency, NDFA,on 1 January 2003. Its role includes advising onthe financing and risk evaluation of Ireland’spublic private partnership procurement projectsand raising or arranging finance for appropriatecapital projects. In this respect it provides a cen-tralised expert service to Departments and cer-tain other State authorities. The PPP procure-ment option should be available to Departmentsand State authorities for application to appro-priate projects where there is the right scale, riskand operational profile to harness the benefits ofthis approach.

As the Deputy will be aware, there are alsoreforms planned in the area of public sector con-tracts for construction and construction relatedservices. The reforms will involve the amendmentand introduction of new standard forms of con-struction contracts which will transfer appropriaterisks to contractors where they are best placed tomanage them. These initiatives seek to reduce thepotential for project cost overruns and providebetter value for money for the State. Consultationwith the construction industry on the contract-related material will commence shortly.

Mr. Bruton: The Minister stated that theDepartments sponsoring these projects follow hisDepartment’s guidelines. The Comptroller andAuditor General has indicated, in the case of theroads programme, that an overrun of \4 billionwas due to underestimates of items that shouldhave been correctly estimated when projects wereoriginally put forward. He also indicated thatthere was an additional overrun of \2 billion onthe programme as a result of altered works. Is the


[Mr. Bruton.]Minister stating that in the case of the projectswhich generated such a massive overrun, thesponsoring Departments applied the guidelinesset down by his Department? The Comptrollerand Auditor General strongly criticised thoseinvolved for not applying the guidelines. He alsoindicated that proper reassessments were not car-ried out when changes were made and that itemswhich should have been costed were not prop-erly costed.

Is the Minister living in cloud cuckoo land? Heis failing to recognise what Accounting Officersare telling us, namely, that the rules to which herefers are not being applied. That is why therehave been so many overruns and why so manyprojects have not been delivered on time. TheGovernment needs to get to grips with the situa-tion. If the Minister continues to read replies ofthe sort he has just read into the record of theHouse, he will not get to grips with it.

Mr. Cowen: There has been a great improve-ment in this area and major projects are nowcoming in not only on time but before time andon budget. The learning curve relating to this pro-cess was not sufficiently steep and we did notcome to grips quickly enough with certain prob-lems that arose. Some of these problems cameabout as a result of judicial reviews which aroseon foot of people exercising their right under theexisting system to delay matters. As a result ofthe opposition that was organised by people whohad difficulties with particular issues — many ofthese have been well publicised — huge costswere incurred on behalf of the taxpayer. Perhapsthat matter should be highlighted, particularly tothose who state that we have the luxury to waittwo, three or four years for judicial reviews etc.to be completed.

Delays do not always occur as a result of whatthe Deputy would portray as internal institutionalincompetence but are rather caused by actionstaken by people. We are trying to roll out a capi-tal programme of a greater magnitude than anyseen in the past. In that context, we must ensurethat the statutory and legislative framework issuch that it compares favourably with those thatapply in other countries on the Continent whichdo not appear to experience the same level ofproblems as Ireland in this area.

We have updated the guidelines — which wereoriginally drafted in 1994 — to take account ofthe factors to which I refer. It is not, as theDeputy suggested, all down to internal incompet-ence. As he is aware, a number of delays occurredwhich were outside the control of those managingthe projects. Perhaps everyone would be betterserved if the costs involved in dealing with suchdelays were highlighted rather than suggestingthat they are a luxury we can afford and a priceworth paying.

Mr. Bruton: What sanctions are imposed if aDepartment does not meet the guidelines? Let us

move away from roads and consider the positionvis-a-vis hospital projects. In some instances,Ministers have approved projects, investmentshave been made and then the new facilities couldnot be opened. Deputy Burton will be aware of anotable example of such a project in her constitu-ency. Surely someone must take the rap for notproperly planning a project and ensuring that itcould be opened when taxpayers money has beenspent. What sanctions does the Department applywhere the guidelines are manifestly not having aneffect in terms of the way projects are planned?

Mr. Cowen: I previously served as Minister forHealth and Children and am aware it can be thecase that when a capital project — for whichthere have been many calls and in respect ofwhich everyone is agreed — is proceeded with,industrial relations issues begin to arise on thecurrent side in terms of staffing levels etc. Peopleseek leverage and this can cause problems inrespect of attempts to open a facility. This hap-pened in my constituency on one occasion duringan election campaign. When else would it hap-pen? It did not have the desired result for someof those involved, however, because Fine Gael,not Fianna Fail, lost a seat.

One may be providing much better facilities,both in terms of work and care environments —I refer here, in particular, to geriatric and othercare environments — and one may discover thatfurther negotiations need to be undertakenbecause those facilities have been improved.

Mr. Bruton: Is the Minister saying that theseproblems are always caused by someone who isexploiting the situation?

Mr. Cowen: No. I am saying that there arereasons other than those to which the Deputyreferred. There are real problems that arise.

Mr. Bruton: There have been breaches of theguidelines with which the Minister has failed tocome to grips.

Mr. Cowen: I have brought forward new guide-lines. I have circulated these and I want them tobe implemented. That is where I stand and I willbe accountable for what I do.

Mr. Bruton: The Minister said that he was pre-paring guidelines.

Mr. Cowen: I have circulated guidelines relat-ing to contracts for implementation. I will also beengaging in detailed discussions with the con-struction industry in respect of other aspects ofthis matter.

There has been an improvement in the way thesystem operates. Deputy Bruton, in his positionas an Opposition spokesperson, is trying to sug-gest that nothing has been done and that theymoney has been wasted or has disappeared intothin air. That is not the case and there havebeen improvements.


Mr. Bruton: I am not pretending that it is thecase.

Mr. Cowen: The Deputy never made that clear.

State Properties.

9. Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Fin-ance the position regarding the planned sale of

Building Title Price Closing Date ofSale

\

2 Church St., Dungarvan, Co. Waterford. Fee Simple 337,000 12 May 2004.

Lad Lane, Dublin 2. Leasehold — 92 years. 22,500,000 5 May 2004.

Blacklion Customs Frontier Post Site, Cavan. 21,586.23 16 March 2004.

72-76 St. Stephen’s Green, Dublin 2. Fee Simple 52,300,000 15 Sept. 2004.

Kilmacthomas Garda Station, Co. Waterford. Fee Simple 100,000 13 August 2004.

14-16 Lord Edward St., Dublin 8. Fee Simple 8,780,140.48 30 August 2004.

Thomastown Garda Station, Co. Kilkenny. Fee Simple 450,000 7 Dec. 2004.

Total 2004: 84,488,726.71

Two sites were also made available to the Depart-ment of the Environment, Heritage and LocalGovernment for affordable housing, one at Jam-estown Road, Inchicore, and the other at Infirm-ary Road.

The bulk of the proceeds of these sales will goto finance the decentralisation programme, while\10 million has been applied to priority projects,mainly in the Garda area. Identification ofproperties surplus to requirements evolves con-tinuously and it is not possible to confirm whatproperties will be disposed of in 2005. Prematurerelease of disposal information and timescaleswould also affect the potential income from suchdisposals.

Ms Burton: What is the position regarding thecurrent proposals for decentralisation? The Mini-ster of State indicated that the bulk of the moneyraised will go to finance the decentralisationprogramme but no progress is being made on thatprogramme at present.

Even in Tullamore, in the constituency of theMinister and the Minister of State, FAS has runinto severe problems. The Minister of State mayrecall he suggested that one sell old properties ata high price and buy new sites cheaper for decen-tralisation, as in Tullamore. However, the boardof FAS has reported that the price at which thesite in Tullamore is now being offered is doubleor triple that originally suggested and, as such,is unacceptable.

What is the impact on the decentralisation pro-posals of the resignation of Mr. Philip Flynn?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy is going wayoutside the remit of Question No. 9. That matterdoes not arise. I am allowing the Deputy’s ques-tion on properties.

State property announced; if he will list the prop-erty sold and the amount raised; the way in whichthe money raised has been used; the properties itis planned to sell during 2005; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7155/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): The list of property sold by theOffice of Public Works to date in 2005 and theamounts raised are as follows:

Ms Burton: He is the chairman of the Govern-ment’s decentralisation body.

An Ceann Comhairle: I understand we are onQuestion No. 9, which refers specifically to thelist of properties sold, the amount raised, the wayin which the money raised has been used and theproperties it is planned to sell during 2005. Thatis what the question is about.

Ms Burton: I have asked the Minister of Statethose questions, specifically, because no progressappears to have been made. What is the effect ofthe resignation of Mr. Philip Flynn on the decen-tralisation programme?

An Ceann Comhairle: I am allowing the Mini-ster of State to answer those questions, but wecannot go into other questions because otherMembers have questions to be answered.

Mr. Parlon: I believe that Deputy Burton isagain relying on poor sources of information. Theboard of FAS has no interest in any property inTullamore.

Ms Burton: I said FAS was told to acquire aproperty, which it did not do because the valuehad tripled.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Minister of State,without interruption, please.

Mr. Parlon: The property in question is in Birr,County Offaly, which is quite a distance fromTullamore. The speculation referred to by theDeputy, which is entirely inaccurate, appeared, Ibelieve, in one of the national newspapers. Iunderstand the board of FAS has now decided tobuy that property. It has been advised by theOPW that the price sought is well within the

103 Fisheries 3 March 2005. Protection 104

[Mr. Parlon.]range of the amount being paid for propertythroughout the country. I understand that part-icular deal is moving along quickly.

Likewise, in terms of the Deputy’s referenceto the lack of progress on decentralisation, I amhopeful the Minister of Finance and I will shortlymake substantial announcements with regard toprogress, in terms of the acquisition of sites andfurther progress.

Ms Burton: Will the Minister of State commenton the price of the sites?

An Ceann Comhairle: I would like to getanother question in before 4.45 p.m.

Benchmarking Awards.

10. Mr. Bruton asked the Minister for Financeif he has decided on the membership of the publicservice benchmarking body for its next phase ofwork; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7127/05]

Mr. Cowen: I refer the Deputy to my previousreply of 1 February 2005. In the first public ser-vice pay agreement under Sustaining Progress,the parties agreed that the benchmarking processwas the appropriate way to determine public ser-vice pay rates. They committed themselves toengage in consultation on the terms of reference,modus operandi, establishment and timescale ofa further benchmarking exercise.

In the pay agreement reached in June 2004under the mid-term review of Sustaining Progressthe parties agreed that the benchmarking bodywill commence its next review in the second halfof 2005, to report in the second half of 2007.Under the agreement the parties agreed to reviewthe operation of the first benchmarking exerciseand consider ways in which, based on experiencegained in the last exercise, the process can beimproved and streamlined. It was also decidedthat the membership of the benchmarking bodyand its terms of reference will be agreed betweenthe two parties not later than July 2005. Member-ship of the benchmarking body has not yet beendecided and will be the subject of considerationand consultation by the parties over the comingmonths.

Mr. Bruton: On the last occasion, bench-marking cost the taxpayer \1.3 billion. Surelysomebody representing the taxpayers’ interestsshould have a role in deciding the membership ofthe benchmarking body. Should there not be amember of that body who is watching out forissues such as value for money and public servicereform? I am not satisfied at the way this is beingstructured because benchmarking was chargedwith problems over non-transparency before andit looks as if this will happen again.

Mr. Cowen: To answer that specific sup-plementary question, as stated in the national pay

agreement, the parties considered in its requestthat the body should seek to ensure the optimumlevel of transparency consistent with the efficientand effective operations of the benchmarkingprocess. How this is reflected in the report is amatter for the benchmarking body as it is inde-pendent. In the last exercise it felt restrained asregards the amount of information it could givebecause of the assurances on confidentiality thathad been given when researching the data under-lying its examination. In any event, in an exerciseof this type, if endless debate and nit-picking areto be avoided, all information cannot be releasedand some selectivity must enter into the equation.It would be desirable for the body to give agreater amount of information this time around.However, that is a matter for the body to decideand the Government represents the taxpayer inthese matters.

Mr. Bruton: The Government did not do verywell on the last occasion.

Mr. Cowen: I disagree.

Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.

Adjournment Debate Matters.

An Ceann Comhairle: I wish to advise theHouse of the following matters in respect ofwhich notice has been given under StandingOrder 21 and the name of the Member in eachcase: (1) Deputy Eamon Ryan — to ask the Mini-ster how he intends to decide on the appropriatelevel for the wild salmon catch for 2005; (2)Deputy Healy — the need for the Minister toapprove the relocation of the Tipperary Institutefrom its current location to the Watson Estate,Ballingarrane, Clonmel; (3) Deputy Neville —construction of a new national school at Kilfin-ane, County Limerick; (4) Deputy Howlin — toask the Minister the implications of the decisionof the European Commission to veto a plan forgrant aid for the Intel development in Leixlip;and (5) Deputy Boyle — to ask the Minister theimplications of the European Commission’s indi-cation that grant assistance cannot be offered toIntel in Leixlip.

The matters raised by Deputies Eamon Ryan,Howlin, Boyle and Healy have been selected fordiscussion.

Adjournment Debate.

————

Fisheries Protection.

Mr. Eamon Ryan: I thank the Ceann Comh-airle for allowing me to raise this matter of enor-mous importance. We face the extinction of wildsalmon on many of our most important rivers.The Minister has set himself against the possiblebuy-out of offshore indiscriminate drift nets, a

105 Fisheries 3 March 2005. Protection 106

policy that goes against all scientific advice that Ihave seen. While Ireland is unique in the northAtlantic in allowing such indiscriminate fisheries,the Minister puts out ridiculously inflated buy-outcosts and said he stands against it. In response toa question from me on 8 February, he said theGovernment’s current strategy is to develop asustainable commercial and recreational salmonfishery sector through aligning catches on the bestavailable scientific advice. That forms the basis ofmy question because the best scientific advice wasclearly set out in a report by the standing scien-tific committee to the National Salmon Com-mission, presented earlier this year, which showsthe crisis as regards wild salmon in our rivers, notjust on the rivers one might expect, the Liffey,Boyne, Suir and Nore, the east coast rivers, butalso the Shannon, the Corrib and in Sligo wheresome of our previously healthiest rivers are in astate of crisis.

The scientific advice clearly indicates that thereis no surplus, that we are below the conservationlimits and should not allow any catch, if at allpossible, in such rivers. The scientists, Dr. PaddyGargan of the Central Fisheries Board, and Dr.Niall O Maoileidigh of the Marine Institute,recommended a national commercial catch of90,000 fish and another 27,000 to be caught byrod, to give a total of 122,300 fish. That, everyonebelieved, was the figure the National SalmonCommission would approve this year. For somereason, at the recent meeting of the NationalSalmon Commission, the Central Fisheries Boardand the other boards proposed a higher figure of137,000 for the commercial catch plus a rod catchof 30,000, to give a total of 167,000 fish. That isinexplicable. It is impossible to understand. I canonly assume that political direction was given tothe fisheries boards to get them to increase therecommended quotas, because there is no justifi-cation for not accepting not only the advice of ourown scientists, but that of ICES, the InternationalCouncil for the Exploration of the Sea, that weshould stick to a 75% probability of meeting con-servation limits.

It seems that the National Salmon Commission,by a majority vote, was completely against such aproposal and is recommending this much higherquota, which I believe further increases the possi-bility of wild salmon extinction on rivers such asthe Liffey, the Boyne, the Corrib, the Shannonetc. I believe this is one of the greatest scandalscurrently evolving in this country. I want to knowhow the Minister will decide on this issue whenhe sets the quota, which he has yet to do. He hasa recommendation from the salmon commission,but he does not necessarily have to follow it. Iurge him to follow the scientific advice and tostick with the recommended catch level of122,000. If he fails to do that, it makes a mockeryof Government policy and a nonsense of his state-ment in the House a month ago that policy is toalign catches on the best available scientificadvice. That advice is patently and perfectly clear.

The Minister will ignore it at his peril becausethere will be uproar from anglers, conser-vationists and people who do not want wildsalmon to become extinct, which current Govern-ment policy ensures will happen rapidly.

Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ-ment (Mr. Martin): I apologise to the house forthe Minister of State at the Department ofCommunications, Marine and Natural Resources,Deputy Gallagher, on whose behalf I am takingthis debate.

The Minister of State relies upon the advice ofthe National Salmon Commission and thenational fisheries managers executive indetermining the terms of the wild salmon and seatrout tagging scheme which sets out annual dis-trict quotas for the commercial salmon catch. Hedoes not receive advice on this matter from theInternational Council for the Exploration of theSea as suggested by the Deputy. The NationalSalmon Commission is an independent statutorybody established under the Fisheries(Amendment) Act 1999 to assist and advise theMinister of State on the conservation, manage-ment, protection and development of the nationalsalmon resource. In particular, it advises on thenational wild salmon and sea trout taggingscheme regulations. The commission includesrepresentatives of the commercial fishing sector,the angling sector and other relevantstakeholders.

The National Salmon Commission is advised inits work by its standing scientific committee,which includes scientists from Bord IascaighMhara, the Central Fisheries Board, the Depart-ment of Environment, Heritage and LocalGovernment, the Environmental ProtectionAgency, the Loughs Agency and the MarineInstitute. The standing scientific committeeadvice is formulated each year in accordance withthe latest guidelines on fish stock assessmentfrom the International Council for the Explor-ation of the Sea.

On 30 November 2004, the standing scientificcommittee presented its preliminary recommend-ations to the commission on the precautionarysalmon catch advice for the 2005 fishing season.At that time, the scientific committee’s prelimi-nary advice recommended that the total numberof salmon to be exploited by all fishing methodsin 2005 should not exceed 122,305 fish. Thisadvice was updated to a figure of 124,571 fishwhen the final catch statistics report for the 2004season became available from the Central Fisher-ies Board towards the end of January 2005. In themeantime, the preliminary scientific advice wasconsidered by the national fisheries managementexecutive from a fisheries management perspec-tive. It submitted its advice and recommendationsto the Minister of State on 14 February regardingsalmon conservation measures and salmon quotasfor 2005 and beyond.

The national fisheries management executivehas recommended that the total catch of wild

107 Industrial 3 March 2005. Development 108

[Mr. Martin.]salmon in 2005 should not exceed 173,854. Thenational fisheries management executive advicealso includes recommendations for a suite of con-servation measures that should be introduced inthe fishery. It believes that if these measures areintroduced in 2005, a provision of 27,500 fishshould be sufficient for exploitation by anglersthis year. With this figure in mind, the nationalfisheries management executive recommends thatthe national commercial total allowable catch,TAC, for 2005 should not exceed 146,174 fish.The National Salmon Commission met on 22February 2005 to consider the scientific and man-agement advice available with a view to finalisingits recommendations on the management of thewild salmon fishery in 2005.

The chairman, in his letter of 1 March 2005 andwhich the Minister of State only received today,advises that the commission was unable to reach aconsensus on either the scientific or managementquota proposals. However, he advises that thecommission endorsed, by a majority decision, acompromise proposal that the national commer-cial catch of salmon for 2005 should not exceed139,900 fish and that this recommendation ismade on the basis that the commission wouldadopt the scientific committee’s advice by the2007 season at the latest. The chairman alsoreports that no agreement could be secured at thecommission on the reductions in annual bag limitsfor anglers that have been proposed by thenational fisheries management executive. As aresult, he recommends that this issue shouldremain on the agenda for future consideration bythe National Salmon Commission.

Having only just seen the advice from theNational Salmon Commission for the first timetoday, the Minister of State will need to takesome time to consider all the advice and its impli-cations in the widest context. The Minister ofState will make a decision in this matter shortlyand it is his intention to publish the draft wildsalmon and sea trout tagging scheme regulationsfor a 30-day consultation period later this monthin accordance with the requirements of the Fish-eries Acts. During this time, interested partieswill have an opportunity to submit any objectionsthey may have. Following the receipt and con-sideration of these, the Minister of State will thenmake a final decision on the scheme.

Industrial Development.

Mr. Howlin: I thank the Ceann Comhairle forallowing me the opportunity to raise what is acritical issue for Ireland’s economic progress. Ihope to get a comprehensive response from theMinister.

The decision of the Government, in the face ofreported opposition from the European Com-mission, not to proceed with plans to providegrant aid for the planned extension of the Intelplant at Leixlip, County Kildare, raises a series ofimportant questions that need to be addressed by

the Government. This is an important issue forthe people of Leixlip and surrounding areas whowere looking forward to the 400 additional jobsat the expanded Intel plant. It is equallyimportant for other parts of the country wherepeople are concerned that their hopes ofattracting foreign manufacturing industry mightbe dashed by any wider decision of the EuropeanCommission to prohibit grant aid on the basisthat it might constitute an illegal state aid.

Intel is a major employer and a flagship projectfor Ireland’s high technology sector. Some peoplemight argue, with some validity, that a huge andvery profitable multinational company like Inteldoes not need grants from the State, and that isprobably true. However, this is now the basis onwhich decisions on the location of multinationalcompanies are made. If we are not able to com-pete with other international locations outsidethe EU for grant aid, then there is clearly adanger that we may lose out.

The situation is made all the more uncertain bythe fact that no determination has been made bythe European Commission on the matter. We donot know whether the grant aid proposal wouldhave been approved by the Commission becausethe Government took the extraordinary step ofwithdrawing the application. Governmentsources are quoted as saying that there were clearindications from the Commission that it was pre-paring to rule against financial assistance, butsurely there was a case for allowing a decision tobe made so that everyone would be clear aboutwhere the Commission stood. This is especiallythe case since we understand that the Inteldevelopment is going ahead in any event. Theremust have been a strong case to be made thatthe proposal did not constitute an illegal state aid,especially since it is quite clear that there was noprospect of Intel locating this project anywhereelse in the EU. If it was not coming to Ireland, itwas clearly going to go elsewhere in the world.

As a matter of urgency, the Minister must clar-ify why this package has fallen through andspecifically why the Government decided to with-draw it before a final decision was made by theCommission. He should also explain why hisDepartment and IDA Ireland came to hold aview on this aid package which was so at variancewith the European Commission that the packagewas withdrawn. We need a detailed explanationfrom the Minister on why the proposal was sovigorously opposed by the Commission. Heshould also indicate what implications this has forother projects in the pipeline, particularly in thevital high technology sector.

It is important that we know whether this islikely to be a once-off occurrence or whetherthere are ongoing implications for the IDAIreland strategy of developing the high-tech-nology sector. Foreign investment has been agreat source of jobs over the past four decades. Itis essential for our economic future that weshould be able to continue to source jobs in this


way. However, the experience with this project,as well as the warning from some that the era oflarge-scale state aid for industry is nearing anend, provide a timely warning against placing allour eggs in the one industrial basket. While con-tinuing to seek investment from abroad, we alsoneed to make more effort than we have done inrecent years to promote the development of theindigenous high technology sector and manufac-turing industry. A clear enunciation of Govern-ment strategy is now urgently required.

Mr. Boyle: I thank the Ceann Comhairle forallowing me to raise this issue. I also thank theMinister for attending and giving this issue theserious consideration it deserves.

This decision by the Government has enor-mous implications for future industrial policy inIreland. It demands an immediate response forthose of us who need to know the future directionof Government industrial policy. The Ministercan be assured of some degree of support, asDeputy Howlin indicated, in initially questioninghow inward investment to Ireland is regulated atEU level. However, the Minister has contacts atEuropean Council level and at the Commissionand cannot have been unaware of feelings amongthe Commission and other member states towhich Ireland needs to respond if it is to framean industrial policy for the future.

5 o’clock

Members on this side of the House believe itwas the intention of the enterprise strategy groupthat we should not only recognise that foreign

direct investment has brought manyjobs to Ireland and has the potentialto bring more, but must also accept

the need to reduce our reliance on it. Theenterprise strategy group recommended thatindigenous companies based on research anddevelopment must be encouraged to a greaterextent, not in substitution for foreign directinvestment but to enable us to avoid in future cir-cumstances like those under discussion.

I concur with Deputy Howlin in what I wouldlike to hear from the Minister. I wish to knowwhat will be the immediate impact of the Govern-ment’s action on other projects. A similar pack-age is in place for Centrecore which the Govern-ment seems confident will be approved in itscurrent form. Surely, questions must be askedabout the feasibility of pursuing State grant assist-ance for projects such as the one involving John-son and Johnson which appears comparable tothe project the Government proposed for Intel.We require more information if we are to pro-ceed further in establishing worker confidence inthe companies involved and general business con-fidence in the direction of the State’s industrialpolicy.

In the brief time available to him, it is hopedthat the Minister can provide the House with abrief overview of the status of the enterprisestrategy group’s recommendations. ManyMembers had hoped that unlike its predecessors,the Culliton and Telesis reports, the group’s

report would include a strategy to implement itsrecommendations. We hoped it was not a reportwhich was likely to remain unconsulted on alibrary shelf for years to come. While the Ministermight argue that upwards of 70% of the report’srecommendations are being implemented in oneform or other, some of the 30% which have notbeen implemented are key recommendations ofthe Enterprise strategy group on the organisationof Enterprise Ireland, that IDA Ireland and For-fas should be brought under the same umbrellaand that there should be different arms dealingwith marketing and technology.

While we are all concerned at the nature of theimpasse with which we are faced and its impacton industrial policy, I would like the Minister toarticulate how the opportunity to recast Irishindustrial policy to give birth to ideas expressedin the report of the strategy group and those ofits predecessors will be seized. At last, we canbegin to offer the support necessary for indigen-ous Irish industry to facilitate research anddevelopment. In a decade or two, we should beable to point to successes in the Irish economyand to a company in the high technology sectorwhich is the equivalent of Nokia in Finland.

Unfortunately, the above is indicative of thegap which exists here. While we are reacting tothe immediate implications of the Commissiondecision for foreign direct investment, we shouldbe thinking about how to develop investmentopportunities within the economy. I would like tohear a positive contribution from that perspectivefrom the Minister.

Mr. Martin: I thank the Deputies for raisingthis important matter and, at the outset, recordmy disappointment at the outcome of the aidnotification procedure. Notwithstanding recentdevelopments, it is clear that Ireland will continueto face global competition for future investments.It is to be regretted that the European Com-mission has opted such a narrow interpretation ofits conditions when projects like Intel can locateanywhere in the world. I have made this pointvery clearly to Commission officials on numer-ous occasions.

The vast majority of inward investment pro-jects need not, however, undergo this process. Ofthe very small number of projects that do, eachproject must be examined in the context of itsindividual elements. We cannot, therefore, drawgeneric conclusions from the Commission’sdecision and must be careful to ensure we do notdo so. Recently, for example, the Lucent Techno-logies-Bell Labs investment of \69 million toestablish a global headquarters for research intotelecommunications and supply-chain techno-logies in Ireland was successfully notified to theEU.

While IDA Ireland considers the outcome ofthe Intel case to be unhelpful in the progressingof investment projects of this size, it does notenvisage that it will have a direct negative impacton Ireland’s ability to attract foreign direct invest-


[Mr. Martin.]ment in the future. Financial support is only oneof a combination of factors which makes Irelandattractive and competitive to inward investment.The availability of highly educated young peoplewith the skills and ability to use knowledgequickly, flexibly and creatively has been vital inattracting inward investment. The educationsystem is focused on continuous learning and pur-sues a collaborative approach with business andindustry. The Government’s science foundationprogramme contributes to the improvement ofresearch capabilities and skills in Irish universitiesin partnership with international business andworld-leading centres of research excellence.

Ireland continues to invest heavily in infra-structure, especially in the areas of access andtelecommunications, and the Government’snational development plan is establishing highquality physical and social infrastructure. Irelandhas retained a competitive operating environmentwhile undergoing a transformation in much of itsbusiness structures in response to new modelsand the needs of global enterprise. We offer oneof the most attractive corporate tax environmentsin the world in which a rate of 12.5% applies toall corporate trading profits. Ireland consistentlyoutperforms other locations in providing the bestreturn on investment to US companies. We alsocompete on a par with the best, most advancedcountries in the world for business. We are win-ning investments of the highest quality across thewide range of business types and sectors in whichwe have chosen to compete.

The current regional aid guidelines will expireat the end of 2006. Discussions have commencedon the guidelines which will cover the period2007-13 on the basis of proposals from the Euro-pean Commission. In considering the new guide-lines, I am influenced by comments in the Com-mission communication, Working together forgrowth and jobs — A new start for the LisbonStrategy, which states that the renewed strategywill focus on growth and jobs. According to theCommission, if we are to succeed we must ensurethat Europe becomes a more attractive place inwhich to invest and work while shaping policieswhich allow our businesses to create more andbetter jobs.

Consideration of the new guidelines shouldfocus on ensuring that the reform of State aidpolicy and, specifically, the shaping of the newregional aid policy are geared towards allowinga sufficient degree of flexibility to promote therealisation of the objectives and targets of the re-launched Lisbon strategy. State aid rules shouldnot be solely inward looking, nor should they bedesigned primarily to regulate State aid withinthe European Union. As I pointed out to theCommission, the world is changing rapidly andEurope must look outwards every bit as much asit looks internally. The rules must recognise theneed for the EU to be internationally competitivein attracting investment. Any desire to reduce

regional aid within the Union must be balancedwith the need to recognise that all member statesface an increasingly competitive threat fromother locations around the world in attractinginvestment. These countries not only have accessto much lower cost bases and improving skills andinfrastructure, but are less restricted in the levelsand types of aid they can offer.

The Commission has stated that the regionalaid guidelines review must not be approached asan isolated issue. It must also be conceived as anintegral part of a general reform of State aid poli-cies designed to give practical effect to the con-clusions of the European Council which call forless and better targeted State aid. According tothe Commission, this approach implies strict con-trol of what are potentially more distorting formsof aid while allowing member states sufficientflexibility to design aid measures which promotethe realisation of the objectives and targets setout as part of the process of implementing theLisbon agenda.

I am concerned that the focus to date in thereview of the regional aid guidelines has concen-trated on the strict control of State aid. Mechan-isms which provide member states with a suf-ficient degree of flexibility to design aid measuresto realise the objectives and targets of the LisbonAgenda must also be accommodated in the newguidelines and general reform of State aid. Thepackage must encourage a high level of invest-ments and allow disparities to be reduced in linewith the Lisbon objectives.

On the Intel project, I reiterate the commentsI outlined in my press statement yesterday. Asindicated at the outset of my reply, I amextremely disappointed with the outcome of theaid notification. Under the terms of the EuropeanCommission’s multisectoral framework onregional aid for large investment projects, whichcame into general effect on 1 January 2004,approval of the proposed grant aid to Intel wasrequired. Detailed discussions continued untilrecently following the submission of notificationto the Commission in June 2004. It becameapparent in the course of the discussions that theCommission was adopting a different interpreta-tion of the provisions in the multisectoral frame-work than that on which IDA Ireland and myDepartment relied in proposing to grant the aid.The Intel project was the first case to which theframework’s provisions were applied. Substantialfurther information was supplied to the Com-mission and a number of meetings were held.Further submissions were made in an attempt toresolve the differences which arose.

To respond to Deputy Howlin’s point, theGovernment took its decision to withdraw theproposal for aid in agreement with Intel and IDAIreland. It did not take that decision in isolation,which is an important point. I attended meetingswith Commissioner Monti before he retired andwith his successor, Commissioner Kroes. At oneof the meetings, an official made it clear that even

113 Relocation of 3 March 2005. Institute 114

if this went through a full formal process, it wouldnot come out the other end in a positive light. Wehad to be honest with Intel and communicate thatto the company.

Mr. Howlin: Would the location have madeany difference?

Mr. Martin: We repeatedly pointed out toofficials that we were not taking this from any-where in Europe. Location within Ireland wouldnot have made any difference. That is not theissue; the issue is definition of innovation. Duringthe Irish presidency, as this framework was beingnegotiated and concluded, Ireland was successfulin getting a footnote into the framework agree-ment which allows for flexibility in terms of lead-ing edge technology companies of this kind. Wefelt that clause was the way the Commissionshould have dealt with this particular project.China, India, the US and a range of countries out-side the European Union are putting forwardcompetitive packages for attracting foreign directinvestment. Europe does not have a preordaineddestiny that means it will always be strong. Wemust get competitive and that is what the LisbonAgenda is about. After six months in the job, Ifeel there is a mismatch between the rhetoric andcommitment surrounding the agenda anddecisions of this nature. We must reflect on andreview that at pan-European level, given the com-petitive forces within Europe and outside.

There was a degree of advance spinning beforethis decision was announced by the Commissionyesterday about which I also have concerns. It isimportant, even when going into a full formalprocess, that confidentiality is assured to compan-ies in terms of commercially sensitive materialthey may be asked to submit. The events ofrecent days would not lend confidence to the pro-cess and this is a point I intend to take up with theCommission in light of my experiences this week.

The Commissioner indicated in writing to methat she felt she would not be prepared toapprove the aid package at preliminary stage andtherefore we cannot now grant the notified aid toIntel. However, work on the project has alreadycommenced at the Leixlip site and will continue.We have a very good relationship with Intel andI have been in constant contact with the companythroughout the process. I met different individ-uals and they are happy with their performance,staff, productivity and outcome in Ireland. Theyfeel that Intel Ireland has been good for the com-pany as a whole, and we feel Intel has been goodfor Ireland. It is my job and the Government’sresponsibility to maintain that strong and fruitfulrelationship into the future.

I agree with the Deputies on the indigenousissue. I am passionately committed to the imple-mentation of the recommendations of theenterprise strategy group, in particular the inter-nationalisation of indigenous Irish companies inthe growth of small and medium-sizedenterprises, equipping them with all that is

required to internationalise and develop marketsand build presence in overseas markets. I have astrong record regarding research and develop-ment in my previous portfolios at the Depart-ments of Education and Science and Health andChildren. I intend to give the issue a majorpriority in the context of Ireland’s competi-tiveness, in particular the commercialisation ofresearch and the linkage between research andsmall businesses in Ireland within the indigenoussector. I am in agreement with the essence ofwhat the Deputies said regarding the importanceof bringing indigenous enterprise centre stage.

Relocation of Institute.

Mr. Healy: I thank the Ceann Comhairle forthe opportunity to raise this issue with the Mini-ster. In 2002 the Government announced thenational spatial strategy for 2002 to 2020. Unfor-tunately, County Tipperary was not mentioned. Itgot no hub or gateway. It was as if the county didnot exist. Clonmel is the main town within thecounty and within the south Tipperary, westWaterford, west Kilkenny and east Limerickareas.

When one looks at the characteristics of gate-ways and hubs as outlined in the strategy,Clonmel met all requirements. The definition ofa hub having a significant urban population in therange 20,000 to 40,000 set in an associated ruralhinterland describes Clonmel. It has the requiredprimary, secondary and outreach education facili-ties, with third level facilities provided at theTipperary Institute. A hub also has a mix of localmedium-sized and larger businesses serving local,regional, national and international markets.Guidant employs 1,100 staff and will employ afurther 1,000 over the next three years. We alsohave companies such as Showerings, MediteEurope, Merck, Sharp and Dohme, ClonmelHealthcare and a host of other industries.

Regarding the requirements of infrastructureand transportation, Clonmel is situated on anational primary road and there is a rail link fromLimerick to Waterford and on to Rosslare port.We have a regional hospital and South TipperaryGeneral Hospital is also based in Clonmel. Arange of required amenities, such as sporting andcultural facilities, are available in Clonmel, as arewater services and facilities for physical, socialand economic development.

These requirements describe Clonmel to per-fection but, for whatever reason, it was not givenhub status. Having discussed the matter with theDepartment and the Minister at the time, thereaction of the county enterprise board, countycouncil, public representatives and the people ofsouth Tipperary was to ensure Clonmel was givende facto hub status. The authorities purchasedBallingarrane estate owned by the Watson familyon the edge of Clonmel. South Tipperary CountyCouncil is establishing a technology and businesspark on the estate. Many bodies have come onboard, including IDA Ireland which purchased 65acres, as well as private interests.

115 The 3 March 2005. Adjournment 116

[Mr. Healy.]The educational element is vital to the estab-

lishment of the technology and business park. Inthe Minister’s reply to the last Adjournmentmatter, he spoke of the Government’s proposalsfor the integration of education with industry,research and development and their importancefor future economic and social development. Inkeeping with this, a request has been made forthe relocation of the Tipperary Institute to thetechnology and business park.

The Tipperary Institute has two campuses, onein Thurles and the other in Clonmel. It is the onlythird level institute in Europe which integratesthird level education with rural and businessdevelopment. I raised this matter in a parliamen-tary question before Christmas and was informedthere was some merit in the request and a reviewwould take place. I hope the review has beencompleted and a decision has been made to relo-cate to Ballingarrane. This is a cost-neutral exer-cise in that no cost is involved in the relocationof the institute to the new business and tech-nology park. I hope the Minister has good newsregarding the matter.

Mr. Martin: I am glad the Deputy has givenme the opportunity to outline, on behalf of theMinister for Education and Science, the proposalsof her Department concerning the proposed relo-cation of the Tipperary institute. A Governmentdecision of 26 July 1995 authorised the establish-ment of the Tipperary Rural and BusinessDevelopment Institute as a company limited byguarantee. The institute was duly incorporatedunder the Companies Acts on 26 March 1998.The institute is now functioning with a board ofdirectors with a wide range of expertise drawnboth from the private and public sectors, inaccordance with its memorandum and articles ofassociation.

The institute opened in 1999 as an alternativetype of institution to the traditional third-levelmodel, with an emphasis on integrating main-stream third-level education with activitiesdesigned to promote rural enterprise and com-munity development. It is located on two cam-puses, one in Thurles and one in Clonmel.

On behalf of the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, Iwould like to outline the background to the pro-posed development. The existing campus inClonmel comprises 21 acres and is owned by theTipperary Rural and Business DevelopmentInstitute, a limited company. The facility com-prises a single-storey structure of over 1,800 sq.m, which consists of a lecture theatre, multi-media centre, classrooms, computer laboratoriesand office accommodation. The site was pur-

chased with Exchequer funding in 1998, when Iwas Minister for Education and Science.

Mr. Healy: The Minister has other responsibil-ities now.

Mr. Martin: I always had a fondness forClonmel.

South Tipperary County Council purchasedcirca 300 acres — the Ballingarrane property —for the development of a large-scale technologypark. The council has proposed that the TRBDIcampus in Clonmel be relocated to the park. Tofacilitate the transfer, the council is amenable toproviding a free site to the institute. The Minister,Deputy Hanafin, understands the institute isagreeable in principle to the council’s proposal.The institute believes the relocation cost toinclude design, construction and fit out of newfacilities would be met from the disposal of exist-ing assets. The institute submitted the proposalto the capital review and prioritisation workinggroup, the Kelly report, on future capital needsin the higher education sector. The Kelly reportrecognised that the proposal has merit on thebasis that it would be self-financing.

Before the Department of Education andScience can consent to the proposal, it will needto be satisfied as to the value of the assets avail-able for disposal against the cost of the new facili-ties, as well as whether the issue of bridging fin-ance arises and, if so, how the institute intends tofinance bridging arrangements. The Departmenthas been pursuing a site in the town for a primaryschool for some time. Discussions have takenplace with TRBDI on the possibility of a site forthe school being made available at its currentlocation. All of these issues will be discussedfurther at a meeting that is being arranged withofficials of the Department of Education andScience and TRBDI.

The submission by TRBDI to the review groupalso included several capital proposals concerningother campus developments in both Clonmel andThurles. However, the review group recom-mended that the policy framework for theinstitute should be looked at again before theother proposed investment proposals could beconsidered. This is interpreted as being a refer-ence to the TRBDI basis structure. The instituteis currently considering its capital developmentproposals in the context of this recommendation.The implications of changes, if any, to the policyframework will need to be assessed carefullybefore substantial capital investment can be sanc-tioned for the institute.

I thank the Deputy again for raising this matteron the Adjournment.

The Dail adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m.on Tuesday, 8 March 2005.

117 Questions— 3 March 2005. Written Answers 118

Written Answers.

The following are questions tabled by Membersfor written response and the ministerial replies

received from the Departments (unrevised).

Questions Nos. 1 to 10, inclusive, answeredorally.

Departmental Agencies.

11. Mr. Gogarty asked the Minister for Financeif he will make a statement on the conflict ofinterest engendered by the role of the NationalTreasury Management Agency in supplying staffto the National Pension Reserve Fund and theNational Development Finance Agency and theresultant withdrawal by the NTMA from advisingthe NRA on obtaining the best financial deal forthe M50 project; if this type of conflict of interestcould have been foreseen; and if this type of con-flict of interest may happen with other agen-cies. [7064/05]

14. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Financeif he is satisfied that there are sufficient safe-guards and guidelines in place covering theinvolvement of the National Development Fin-ance Agency in projects, in view of the fact thatthe agency had to withdraw from advising theNRA on plans for the upgrading of the M50motorway due to a potential conflict of interestby way of its links to a consortium bidding for theproject; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7199/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I proposeto take Questions Nos. 11 and 14 together.

The Government established the NationalDevelopment Finance Agency, NDFA, on 1January 2003. The NDFA has, inter alia, the func-tion of advising State authorities on the optimummeans of financing public investment projects,whether procured through a PPP approach orthrough traditional procurement. The NDFAdoes not have a project approval role.

I am advised that the National Pension ReserveFund Commission, which makes investmentdecisions independently of the Minister for Fin-ance, has made an initial \200 million allocationto PPPs in Ireland. It has also announced that ithas joined a consortium tendering for the M50motorway upgrade.

I am advised that the commission’s involve-ment with PPPs is consistent with the fund’s pur-pose and statutory investment policy and, on thatbasis, I can see no difficulty with it.

I am advised by the NTMA that, while it per-forms the function of manager of the NPRF andalso performs the functions of the NDFA, there isa robust Chinese wall between the two functions.However, given that the NPRF is charged withmaximising the gains for the Exchequer from itsinvestments, while the NDFA is required toadvise on the optimal means of financing publicinvestment projects, there could, in some circum-stances, be a perceived problem, even though

both are seeking to work in the best interests ofthe taxpayer. I am advised that, in its pressrelease of 9 February last on the publication ofits annual review, the NPRF commission statedthat, in future, rather than joining particular con-sortia in tendering for projects, it will make fin-ance available to the winning bidder provided itis satisfied with the prospective rates of return.

Because of the perception I have referred to, Iam advised by the NTMA that the NDFA with-drew from providing advice to the NRA on theM50 project as the NPRF commission haddecided to join a consortium in tendering for theproject.

Special Savings Incentive Scheme.

12. Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Financethe number of special savings investment schemeaccounts opened at the latest date for which fig-ures are available; the average amount of savingsper investor per month; the likely cost to theExchequer of the special savings investmentscheme on the basis of such figures; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7194/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I aminformed by the Revenue Commissioners that allqualifying savings managers are furnishing their2004 SSIA annual returns at present. The Rev-enue Commissioners will shortly begin analysingthese returns and it is expected that final detailsof this analysis will be available at the end ofApril 2005.

All qualifying savings managers have, inadvance of the annual return, provided a declar-ation indicating the number of active accountsheld at 31 December 2004. Based on these 2004declarations, I am informed by the RevenueCommissioners that the total number of activeaccounts at 31 December 2004 was 1,094,188 andthe average monthly subscription was \175.Revisions may be necessary if amendments arereceived at a later date.

As indicated in replies to previous questions, itis not possible to give a definitive answer as tothe eventual cost of the scheme as it is subject toa number of variables such as participants dying,withdrawing from the scheme or varying theirmonthly contributions. The cost of the scheme in2004 was \548 million. The estimated cost in 2005is \560 million. This, however, is not a conclusivefigure, and the final figure may be different ifaccount holders change their monthly contri-butions. The total gross cost over the period ofthe scheme will be reduced by the exit tax to bereceived at the end.

Tax Code.

13. Ms Enright asked the Minister for Financeif he plans changes in the capital gains taxcode. [7072/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As theDeputy may be aware, I have made a number ofchanges to the capital gains tax code in the 2005


[Mr. Cowen.]Finance Bill, as initiated. These include pro-visions relating to the 15% deduction from theconsideration on the disposal of certain assets, tothe updating of the titles of certain bodies whichare exempt from capital gains tax and to anexemption for foreign pension bodies doing pen-sions business in the State.

I have no proposals to make any furtherchanges to the capital gains tax code in the 2005Finance Bill.

Question No. 14 answered with QuestionNo. 11.

Decentralisation Programme.

15. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Financethe anticipated costs, in terms of acquiring andequipping premises and other related costs, at thelatest date for which figures are available, of theoriginal decentralisation programme announcedin budget 2004 and the slimmed down versionannounced in December 2004; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7191/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): TheGovernment’s decentralisation programmeinvolves some 10,500 civil and public service jobsin more than 56 locations. As I have said on anumber of occasions the Government is commit-ted to the full implementation of the programme.

My office has been tasked with procurement ofdevelopment sites in the designated locations andthe procurement of accommodation solutions tothe office and facility requirements of the Depart-ments and agencies involved.

The Office of Public Works, having evaluatedin excess of 700 proposed property solutions inrelation to the decentralisation programmescheduled for the various locations around thecountry has made significant progress in sourcingpossible sites at the locations concerned.

The prevailing property market conditions ineach geographical area will have a significantbearing on the cost of acquiring sites. As theacquisition process is still in progress, it is notpossible at this stage to provide a precise estimateof the cost of the site acquisition programme.However, for working purposes only, an indica-tive figure of \75 million to \100 million is beingused by the OPW.

As the Deputy will be aware, the Decentralis-ation Implementation Group, DIG, announcedthe names of the Departments and organisationsselected to move in the first phase of the prog-ramme on the 24 November 2004. A furtherreport from the group on the procurement andfinancial issues relating to property was also pub-lished on the 24 November 2004.

The next stage in the decentralisation processwill focus on the construction of office accommo-dation on the sites being procured by OPW. Inline with the DIG report on procurement theOPW advertised for expressions of interest in thefirst 15 design-build projects in December 2004.

A very significant response was received and thesubmissions are currently being evaluated.

In relation to the public private partnershipapproach recommended by the DIG my officehas been developing a comprehensive risk-adjusted costing of project elements to measurethe value-for-money of future PPP bids.

It is anticipated that, in the vast majority ofcases, the accommodation facilities will be pro-vided by the construction of new office buildingsand cost estimation can be approached on thatbasis. However, in advance of actual market test-ing of any procurement methodology, it is poss-ible, at this time, only to assign the most generalmeasurements of cost to such a large-scale,diverse and complex programme.

It is estimated that approximately 210,000 sq m— 2.26 million sq ft — of office space will berequired to accommodate the total numbersincluded in the programme. Current industry costnorms in respect of commercial offices wouldindicate an average build-cost to fit-out standard,in the range of \1,450 per square metre to \2,000per square metre. Such figures exclude VAT, pro-fessional fees and inflation. In addition the cost ofequipping the accommodation to standard officeequipment levels could be estimated at c.\4,000per person. This would exclude the cost of infor-mation and communication technology andspecialised equipment requirements. Such gen-eral measurements of cost do not include special-ised facility and equipment requirements andother variables which would arise from the spreadof possible procurement methodologies. Inaddition general cost indicators of this type showa snapshot in time.

It is self-evident that a firmer scale of costs forthe decentralisation programme will only emergeon foot of actual cost proposals being receivedfrom the market. Nevertheless, we can clearlyanticipate that, generally-speaking, the cost ofproviding accommodation infrastructure in prov-incial locations compared to central Dublinlocations should yield considerable cost savings tothe State over time in terms of site costs, capitalbuild costs and indeed maintenance costs.

Stability and Growth Pact.

16. Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Financewhen the terms of the stability pact are likely tobe revised; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7076/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The Euro-pean Commission presented a formal Communi-cation on 3 September 2004, outlining a range ofproposals for strengthening economic governancein the European Union and clarifying the imple-mentation of the Stability and Growth Pact. Sincethen, the issues involved have been the subject ofdetailed and wide-ranging discussions.

The most recent discussions took place at theECOFIN Council of 17 February 2005, whenMinisters made further progress in identifyingareas of common ground. Consideration of the


issues involved is still ongoing. The LuxembourgPresidency has expressed its aim of finalising thereview of the pact by the spring EuropeanCouncil on 22 and 23 March 2005.

Tax Code.

17. Mr. J. O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Fin-ance if he is satisfied with the entry level to thetop rate of income tax; and if he will make a state-ment on the matter. [7138/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As a resultof the budget, the standard rate bands for this andsubsequent years are \29,400 for a single person,\38,400 for a married one-earner couple and\58,800 for a married two-earner couple of which\38,400 is transferable. Lone and widowed per-sons have a standard rate band of \33,400. Tax-able income above these levels is subject to thehigher rate of tax of 42%.

The major portion of available resources forthe personal tax package in budget 2005 wasdevoted to achieving the aim of taking those onthe minimum wage out of the tax net. This ful-filled a key taxation commitment contained in AnAgreed Programme for Government. It willbenefit those on low incomes and will helpremove 66,000 from the tax net for 2005. Overall,after budget 2005, there are over 34% of incomeearners — some 656,500 — outside the tax net.

To the extent that further resources were avail-able for tax reductions in the budget 2005 incometax package, they were used essentially to widenthe standard rate bands so as to increase the entrylevel to the higher rate of tax. The increases inthe standard rate band will ensure that an extra52,000 taxpayers will not pay tax at the higherrate in 2005. The band widening in budget 2005ensures that about 33% of income earners willpay tax at the higher rate in 2005 as comparedwith a projected 36% of income earners if nosuch measure had been included in the budget.

It should be noted that all income earners ben-efited from the tax changes in the recent budgetand that while the proportion on the top rateincreased, there was a reduction in their averagetax rate, that is, tax as a percentage of income. Itshould also be noted that in 2005 a single PAYEworker on the average industrial wage will payover \200 less in tax in 2005 than in 1997 on awage which is over \11,000 greater in value.

Expenditure Review Initiative.

18. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Financeif he is satisfied with the progress under theexpenditure review initiative; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7129/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As I statedin a reply to a previous parliamentary question on1 February this year, I would like to see greaterprogress being made in improving the arrange-ments for carrying out expenditure reviews andin completing reviews.

I am committed to ensuring that we get bettervalue for money from public expenditure. I havetherefore accepted the recommendations in thefirst formal report from the Expenditure ReviewCentral Steering Committee on progress underthe expenditure review initiative, ERI, for theperiod June 2002 to June 2004 which was submit-ted to me last November. This report found thatprogress had been made by Departments andoffices in undertaking systematic evaluation bothwithin and outside the ERI, and in building anevaluation culture. However, it also highlightedsome deficiencies in the process and made anumber of recommendations to improve it. Therecommendations set out in the report requireDepartments to take steps to: address the prob-lems identified in planning, managing, andresourcing the review process; ensure the timelycompletion of reviews in accordance withGovernment decisions; build on the impact andeffectiveness of the review process, with part-icular emphasis on the role of reviews in directingsignificant resource allocation decisions; helpbuild an evaluation culture by engaging pro-actively with the expenditure review process; andfocus reviews on programme areas of significantexpenditure.

They are designed to enhance the improve-ments in the arrangements for carrying outexpenditure reviews since publication of theComptroller and Auditor General’s value formoney report on ERI in January 2002 and toaddress perceived gaps in the responses to therecommendations set out in the Comptroller andAuditor General’s report.

I attach particular importance to the recom-mendations of the steering committee that expen-diture reviews should encompass significantspending programmes, that they should be com-pleted on time, and that their recommendationsshould be followed up on. The responsibility inregard to implementation of these and the otherrecommendations rests in the first instance withDepartments. I therefore wrote to all Ministerslast November on receipt of the steering commit-tee’s report urging them to ensure that theirDepartments and offices take appropriate stepsto implement the recommendations. My Depart-ment also wrote to all Secretaries General on 1March requesting them to: make the necessaryarrangements to complete as soon as possible alloutstanding reviews for which their Departmentis responsible and to report progress in thisregard; indicate the steps which their Depart-ment-office has taken to implement the recom-mendations of the expenditure review report; andpropose topics for the next round of expenditurereviews for the period 2005-07 for submission toGovernment.

Termination of Employment.

19. Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Fin-ance if he is satisfied with the payments made toterminate the employment of the chief executive


[Mr. P. Breen.]of Aer Rianta; and the papers which werepresented to him in this respect before he issuedhis approval. [7125/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I refer theDeputy to my previous replies of 14 October2004, 23 November 2004 and 1 February 2005.

The previous Minister, as shareholder, indi-cated his consent to arrangements, outlined tohim by the chairman of Aer Rianta on 24 Sep-tember last, concerning the package the boardproposed to make to the deputy chief executivewho was leaving the company.

I understand that the proposed packageincluded a lump sum of two and a half times sal-ary, a contribution to pension fund, payment of abonus and retention of company car.

Flood Alleviation Measures.

20. Mr. Kehoe asked the Minister for Financethe level of disruption likely to occur in areas ofDublin where flooding occurred; the proposeddrainage schemes that are implemented; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7121/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): The last major flood event to occurin Dublin happened in November 2002 whenthere was major flooding from the Glasnevin andDrumcondra areas of Dublin city to the Cloneearea on the County Meath border as a result ofthe River Tolka breaking its banks. Analysis hasshown that this flood exceeded the scale of anyprevious flood on record in the catchment.

There was widespread flooding of residentialproperties from Glasnevin to Ballybough. Theriver also broke its banks along the N3 road atBlanchardstown which led to the road beingclosed for a period of time. Residences and roadswere also flooded in the Blanchardstown, Mul-huddart and Clonee areas causing widespreaddamage.

Since this flooding in 2002 the OPW, in co-operation with Dublin City Council, FingalCounty Council and Meath County Council, hasbeen implementing flood alleviation measureswhich were recommended in the River TolkaFlooding Study which was under way at the timeof the 2002 flood. Most of these works have beenconstructed by OPW direct labour as part of ascheme which, when completed, will provide pro-tection against a flood event with a design returnperiod of 100 years. With some exceptions, theworks from Dunboyne in County Meath to theLuke Kelly bridge in Ballybough have mostlybeen completed. The OPW and the local auth-orities have pursued a policy of completing worksin areas where the higher risk of flooding existed.

Flooding also occurred in Dublin city inFebruary 2002 from the River Dodder which wasthe result of tidal surge. Major flooding of resi-dences took place in Ringsend and the northinner city as a result. The OPW had no responsi-bility for the River Dodder but following a

request from Dublin City Council, funding of \1.7million was made available for the constructionof a wall in the Ringsend area from LondonBridge to Ringsend Bridge in order to alleviatethe risk of flooding there.

As a result of flooding in Dublin in February2002, the Dublin coastal flooding protection pro-ject was initiated by Dublin City Council inassociation with Fingal County Council, theOPW, the Department of Communications,Marine and Natural Resources. The project hasbeen part funded by the OPW and a draft finalreport is due shortly. The report examines thecauses and impacts of flooding in an area fromPortmarnock to Booterstown and includes theTolka, Liffey and Dodder estuaries. The reportdeals in particular with the risk to Dublin andFingal from coastal flooding, the need for anearly flood warning system, the identification ofappropriate strategies and policies to combat andmanage the risk of flooding, and the identifi-cation of various works which would add to coas-tal defences already in place.

Initial indications are that the cost of proposedflood defence works in the report is estimated atover \100 million. This report will need to becarefully examined by all the stakeholders beforecommitting to any recommendations contained inthe report. The OPW, in particular, will need toconsider the cost implications in the context ofits annual budget for flood relief activities of \20million approximately, and the large amount offlood alleviation projects currently beingadvanced by OPW.


21. Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Financethe reason mortgage lenders are exempted fromregulation under the Consumer Credit Act1995. [7070/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): All finan-cial service providers that provide loans securedon a person’s principal private residence are sub-ject to the provisions of Part 9 of the ConsumerCredit Act. This is as a result of an amendmentto the Act made last year, following considerationof a recommendation of the 1999 McDowellreport. The Consumer Credit Act is the principalsource of protection to personal borrowers. TheAct subjects all lenders who provide finance onthe security of the family home to a range of obli-gations. These include: provision of a written loanagreement; quoting the APR and any other feesthat will be charged; a requirement to warn theborrower about the risk of losing his or her home;and an obligation to put mortgage protectioninsurance in place. Apart from the special case ofthe family home, the Act does not apply where aloan is given for a commercial purpose.

There is no statutory oversight of interest rates,except for the special case of moneylenders whocome within the scope of Part 8 of the ConsumerCredit Act. This special category of lender typi-cally provides short-term loans to poor credit


risks at very high APRs. Such lenders arerequired to hold a moneylender’s licence and thefinancial regulator can refuse to grant such alicence on the grounds that the cost of credit isexcessive. The requirement to hold such a licence,and the corresponding oversight of interest rates,only applies to this specialist category of lender.

The financial regulator has power under theConsumer Credit Act to give directions to a mort-gage lender in relation to misleading advertising,as well as to prosecute for breaches of the Act.In addition, under the legislation establishing theregulator, its consumer director has responsibilityfor monitoring the provision of financial servicesto consumers generally and the power to requirea provider of such services to furnish informationrelevant to any inquiry or study that the directorchooses to undertake.

Pension Provisions.

22. Mr. Neville asked the Minister for Financeif he has examined the take up of tax relief forpension contributions across different income cat-egories; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7096/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As I statedin my earlier reply it is not possible at present toexamine the take up of tax relief for all pensioncontributions across different income categories.This is because the relevant information is notavailable to the Revenue Commissioners,because the tax relief for pension contributionsfor employees is normally given at source, that is,the taxable income is the income net of pensioncontributions by employees. However, data areavailable in respect of the tax relief for contri-butions to retirement annuity contracts, RACs,across different income categories. RACs areused by the self-employed and by employees whoare not in pensionable employment. It is intendedto examine this data in the context of the reviewof pensions reliefs which forms part of the reviewof tax reliefs for high earners.

Provisions were included in Finance Act 2004requiring employers to give information regard-ing the total employer and employee pensioncontributions in the annual P35 return detailingPAYE paid and so on. We will then have a betterdata set in relation to tax relief for the generalityof pension contributions, which will be useful forpolicy purposes.

Tax Compliance.

23. Ms Lynch asked the Minister for Financethe response received by the Revenue Commis-sioners to the letters sent by ten top banks toapproximately 120,000 customers warning themto regularise their tax affairs by the end of March;the number of responses received; the amountcollected; the number of such cases that havebeen finalised; and if he will make a statement onthe matter. [7184/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I amadvised by the Revenue Commissioners that pre-cise figures are not available as to the number ofletters which issued from the financial insti-tutions. It is understood to be in excess of100,000. It is not known how many accounts orindividuals this represents because some individ-uals had accounts in different banks or in differ-ent branches of the same bank. In other instancesthere was more than one name on the account.

The Revenue Commissioners have advisedthat, following the issue of the letters by the fin-ancial institutions, written responses werereceived from approximately 25,000 persons. Ofthese, approximately 15,000 persons advised thata statement of disclosure would be made, and todate payment has been received from in excess of11,500 cases. The difference is accounted for byduplicate notices received by Revenue at the timeof the initial deadline of 29 March 2004, caseswhere the taxpayer subsequently indicated thatno liability to tax arose, a small number of caseswhere assets are being disposed of to meet theliability owing or where there is an inability topay and cases where no further communicationhas been received from the taxpayer. Whereappropriate, inquiries are continuing in suchcases.

In relation to the balance of the 10,000 writtensubmissions received, these individuals were noti-fied that on the basis of the submission received,a statement of disclosure was not required. I amalso advised that a further 5,000 persons approxi-mately telephoned the Revenue Commissionersand, on the basis on the information provided,most were advised that a written response wasnot required.

To date the total amount collected by the Rev-enue Commissioners from their offshore investi-gation is in excess of \720 million. Details ofamounts collected in respect of this, and otherspecial investigations, are regularly updated onRevenue’s website www.revenue.ie.

Disabled Drivers.

24. Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Fin-ance his plans for reform of the tax concessionsfor disabled drivers. [7136/05]

49. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Financeif he will report on the contents of the report pro-duced by the interdepartmental group whichexamined the 1994 disabled drivers and disabledpassengers tax concession regulations; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7144/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I proposeto answer Questions Nos. 24 and 49 together.

The disabled drivers and disabled passengers(tax concessions) scheme is open to people withdisabilities who meet the specified criteria andhave obtained a primary medical certificate tothat effect. The senior area medical officerattached to the local Health Service Executive isresponsible for both the medical assessment and


[Mr. Cowen.]the issue of the medical certificate. Where theissue of the required certificate is refused, this canbe appealed to the Disabled Drivers MedicalBoard of Appeal, an independent body, whosedecision is final. The medical criteria for the pur-poses of the tax concessions under this schemeare set out in the Disabled Drivers and DisabledPassengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994.Six different types of disablement are listed underthe regulations and a qualifying person mustsatisfy one or more of them.

An individual who obtains a primary medicalcertificate qualifies for remission or repayment ofvehicle registration tax, VRT, repayment of valueadded tax, VAT, on the purchase of the vehicleand a repayment of VAT on the cost of adap-tation of the vehicle. Repayment of the exciseduty on fuel used in the motor vehicle andexemption from annual road tax to local auth-orities are also allowed.

An interdepartmental review group was con-vened to review the operation of the scheme. Theterms of reference of the group were to examinethe operation of the existing scheme, includingthe difficulties experienced by the various groupsand individuals involved with it, both on anadministrative and user level, and to consider thefeasibility of alternative schemes, with a view toassisting the Minister for Finance in determiningthe future direction of the scheme.

The group’s report was published on myDepartment’s website in July 2004 and copieshave been placed in the Oireachtas library. It setsout in detail the genesis and development of thescheme. It examines the current benefits, thequalifying medical criteria, the Exchequer costs,relationship with other schemes and similarschemes in other countries. The report alsomakes a number of recommendations, bothimmediate and long-term, encompassing theoperation of the appeals process and options forthe future development of the scheme.

Following on from the report’s recommend-ations concerning the appeals process, amend-ments to the regulations governing the schemewere made to improve the operation of theappeals process. These were signed by the Mini-ster for Finance on 23 July 2004.

The amendments provided for changes as fol-lows: expanding the panel of medical prac-titioners serving on the Medical Board of Appealfrom three to five, and; amending the appealsprocess by (a) introducing a six month waitingperiod between an appeal and subsequent appli-cation, and (b) introducing the requirement for asecond or subsequent application to be certifiedby a registered medical practitioner to the effectthat there has been material disimprovement inthe medical condition since the previousapplication.

Given the scale and scope of the scheme,further changes can only be made after very care-ful consideration. For this reason, the Govern-

ment has decided that the Minister for Financewill consider the recommendations contained inthe report of the interdepartmental review groupin the context of the annual budgetary processhaving regard to the existing and prospective costof the scheme.

National Pension Reserve Fund.

25. Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Financehis views on the National Pension Reserve FundReview for 2004; if he is satisfied with the rate ofreturn secured by the fund which, at 9.3%, wastwo percentage points below its benchmark; andif he will make a statement on the matter.[7197/05]

46. Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Fin-ance if he will make a statement on the annualreview 2004 published by the National PensionReserve Fund. [7065/05]


I was pleased to note that the commissionreported a return of 9.3% in 2004 or an appreci-ation of \951 million in fund value, excluding the2004 Exchequer contribution of \1,177 million.

As with its investment strategy, the fund’sbenchmarks are determined by the commissionand I have no role in relation to them. I note fromthe review that the fund’s return of 9.3% in 2004was achieved in the context of the completion ofthe commission’s averaging-in or phased entryprogramme to the capital markets. The reviewpoints out that such a strategy will under-performits benchmark in a rising equity market due toits holding less equities and more cash than thebenchmark. Conversely, it leads to out-perform-ance in a falling market.

It is only fair to judge the success or otherwiseof the commission’s averaging-in strategy overthe full period for which it was in effect. In thisregard the review states that the averaging-inprogramme has seen the fund out-perform itsstrategic benchmark by a cumulative 8.9% overthe period since its inception in 2001.

Disclosures to Revenue Commissioners.

26. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Fin-ance the progress made by the Revenue Commis-sioners into allegations that tax improprietiesmay surround trust operations in a bank in Jersey(details supplied); if the Revenue has reached adetermination regarding whether these trustsfacilitated tax evasion as distinct from tax avoid-ance; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7185/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I amadvised by the Revenue Commissioners that sub-stantial progress has been made in relation to thisinquiry. Arising from a voluntary disclosure prog-ramme 254 individuals came forward and madevoluntary disclosures. To date this programme


has recovered in excess of \105 million for theExchequer.

The Revenue Commissioners indicated pre-viously that those individuals who fail to makedisclosures under the voluntary phase of projectswill be pursued with all means available. Theyadvise me that through their investigations andinquiries they have now identified individualswho did not come forward during the voluntaryphase of this particular project and are nowactively pursuing them in relation to breaches ofthe tax code.

It is clear from some of the disclosures and theamount collected to date that in some instancestaxpayers used trusts to facilitate tax evasion.

27. Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Ministerfor Finance the number of High Court orderssought to date by the Revenue Commissionersunder the Finance Act 1999 to require financialinstitutions to supply names, addresses and otherrelevant information regarding holders of bogusaccounts at the latest date for which figures areavailable; the number of cases in which ordershave been granted; the general progress made todate in identifying the holders of such accountswho did not avail of the recent voluntary disclos-ure scheme; and if he will make a statement onthe matter. [7188/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): AuthorisedRevenue officers are empowered to make anapplication to a judge of the High Court seekingan order requiring financial institutions to supplynames, addresses and other relevant informationconcerning account holders who may have heldbogus non-resident deposit accounts. Such appli-cations are made under section 908 of the TaxesConsolidation Act 1997, as amended by the Fin-ance Act 1999. Information supplied by the finan-cial institutions under section 908 orders is theprincipal basis for identifying bogus non-residentaccount holders who did not avail of the volun-tary disclosure scheme in 2001. This inquiry workcommenced on 16 November 2001.

I am advised by the Revenue Commissionersthat 18 applications for orders under section 908have been made and granted. When one includesinstitutions, which have been taken over or amal-gamated with other institutions, these orders seekinformation in respect of accounts in 26 financialinstitutions. No further applications for suchorders are pending in regard to the bogus non-resident account inquiries.

A large volume of information has beenreported to Revenue under the High Courtorders. Inquiry work in relation to the examin-ation of the first batch of taxpayers commencedon 11 October 2002. Further general issues ofinquiry letters were made in January, May, July,September, October 2003 and January 2004.These general inquiry letter issues relate to 91,000non-resident accounts that had Irish addressesconnected to them. A total of 177,000 inquiry let-ters have been issued to taxpayers in respect of

these non-resident accounts. The final generalinquiry letter issue took place in January 2004.

The Revenue Commissioners have informedme that they are satisfied that very significantprogress has been made in this the final phase ofthe investigation. Since 15 November 2001, pay-ments of \342 million have been made to Rev-enue by taxpayers who held bogus non-residentaccounts.

Revenue Investigations.

28. Mr. Costello asked the Minister for Financethe progress made by the Revenue Commis-sioners in their investigation into the reported useof single premium insurance policies as a taxavoidance mechanism; if the precise nature of theinvestigation has been decided; the informationavailable to his Department or the Revenue onthe extent of this practice; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7151/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I amadvised by the Revenue Commissioners that theypropose to initiate an investigation into the useby some taxpayers of insurance-based products tohide income or gains not declared for tax pur-poses. The preliminary work to underpin theinvestigation is nearing finality and I understandthat the formal investigation will be announcedshortly by the Revenue Commissioners. I am notin a position to comment further at this stage.


29. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Financethe position in regard to negotiations with thepublic service unions regarding his proposals torestrict promotional opportunities to staff willingto move to decentralised locations; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7192/05]

47. Dr. Twomey asked the Minister for Financeif he envisages making any special provision forpromotion and for new recruitment in the contextof the decentralisation programme; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7084/05]

51. Mr. Murphy asked the Minister for Financeif his Department has sought to introduce a policythat only Civil Servants prepared to decentralisemay avail of promotion opportunities; the impli-cations of this policy on the career path of civilservants who wish to remain in Dublin; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7176/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I proposeto take Questions Nos. 29, 47 and 51 together.

Promotion and recruitment are key elements ofthe Government’s decentralisation programme.In the implementation phase, they are importantin supporting the efficient movement of Depart-ments and offices to their new locations. In amore decentralised service, acceptance of a post,whether as a result of promotion or open recruit-ment, will have to be conditional on agreementto work in a particular location. The need for newprocedures in these areas has been clearly iden-


[Mr. Cowen.]tified as a priority by the Decentralisation Imple-mentation Group.

In accordance with the group’s recommend-ations, the Department of Finance began detaileddiscussions in 2004 with the staff unions on theprocedures which have to be put in place to sup-port the programme and to develop arrange-ments for a fully decentralised service. It is desir-able that these procedures be discussed andagreed between management and staff.

The Government’s position is quite clear: newpromotion and recruitment arrangements arerequired in the Civil Service which take accountof the decentralisation programme. It will not bepossible in many locations to fill all the postsbeing transferred solely by the lateral transfer ofvolunteers. If promotion and recruitment policiesare not changed, it could delay implementationof the programme and give rise to extra costs.Getting these policies right is important for theprogramme and important for the long-termmanagement of the Civil Service.

In 2004, arrangements were made to fill somepromotion posts from existing interdepartmentalcompetitions on the basis that promotees wouldagree to decentralise.

In relation to recruitment, a number of specificposts in the Civil Service, which were known tobe decentralising as part of the Government’sprogramme, were advertised both internally andpublicly on the basis that the successful candidatewould agree to decentralise.

Discussions are continuing between the man-agement and the Civil Service unions with a viewto agreeing new promotion and recruitmentmechanisms to support implementation of theprogramme.

Proposed Legislation.

30. Mr. Coveney asked the Minister for Fin-ance if he will report on the purpose of the Dor-mant Financial Assets Bill, which appeared in theGovernment’s autumn 2004 legislative prog-ramme; the types of financial assets being con-sidered for inclusion in the Bill; the reason theBill no longer appears on the Government’s legis-lative programme; and if he will make a state-ment on the matter. [7177/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Theintended purpose of the Dormant FinancialAssets Bill was to extend the Dormant Accountstreatment of assets, other than life assurance andbank accounts, which have been dealt with inrecent legislation. However, a secondary legis-lation approach can be adopted for some itemsand those requiring primary legislation can nowbe accommodated in the proposed Financial Ser-vices (Consolidation) Bill.

The purpose of the Financial Services(Consolidation) Bill is to consolidate and simplifyfinancial services legislation, in accordance withthe Government’s Better Regulation agenda. TheBill may also accommodate certain amendments

to related primary legislation, for example, legis-lation to deal with dormant financial assets. It isexpected that this Bill will be published in late2005.

Departmental Appointments.

31. Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Fin-ance if it is intended to appoint a new chairpersonto the Decentralisation Advisory Committee, fol-lowing the recent resignation of Mr. Phil Flynn;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7193/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Followingon from the recent resignation of the chairman ofthe Decentralisation Implementation Group, it ismy intention to make an appointment to fill thevacancy as chairman of the group as soon aspossible.

Tax Code.

32. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Financewhen the Government expects to honour thecommitment given in An Agreed Programme forGovernment that 80% of all earners would paytax only at the standard rate, especially in view ofthe fact that the proportion of taxpayers payingat the higher rate is expected to increase from32.61% in 2004 to 33.17% in 2005; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7153/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): TheGovernment remains committed to the aim ofhaving 80% of all earners paying tax only at thestandard rate and I will be looking at how bestwe can achieve this over my next two budgets. AnAgreed Programme for Government specificallyindicates that progress in relation to taxationcommitments would be “over the next fiveyears”. The five years began in 2002 and extendto 2007.

However, I draw the Deputy’s attention to thefact that An Agreed Programme for Governmentalso contains an over-arching commitment aboutthe need to pursue responsible fiscal policies andto maintain the public finances in a healthy con-dition. Accordingly, actions in relation to taxationmust have regard to the prevailing budgetary cir-cumstances and the resources available to me atbudget time.

In budget 2005 I decided to use the major por-tion of resources available for a personal taxpackage to achieving the priority of taking thoseon the current minimum wage out of the tax net.I also devoted money as a priority to increasingthe age exemption limits, which assist the elderly,for the fourth year in a row.

To the extent that further resources were avail-able for tax reductions in the budget 2005 incometax package, they were used essentially to widenthe standard rate bands so as to raise the entrylevel to the higher rate of tax. The increases inthe standard rate band will ensure that an extra52,000 taxpayers will not pay tax at the higherrate in 2005 and that an estimated 33% of income


earners will pay tax at the higher rate in 2005compared with a projected 36% of income ear-ners if no such measure had been included inthe budget.

It should be noted that all income earners ben-efited from the tax changes in the recent Budget.It should also be noted that in 2005 a singlePAYE worker on the average industrial wage willpay over \200 less in tax in 2005 than in 1997 ona wage which is over \11,000 greater in value.

33. Mr. Hayes asked the Minister for Financeif his attention has been drawn to the apparentanomaly in the tax relief scheme for hospitalswhereby it excludes certain psychiatric hospitals;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7081/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): When thescheme of capital allowances for the constructionof private hospitals was introduced in 2001, thequestion of including psychiatric hospitals andgeriatric-psychiatric hospitals within the ambit ofthis scheme did not arise.

In recent months I have received proposalswith regard to the provision of capital allowancesfor psychiatric hospitals. These proposals arebeing examined in my Department.

Pension Provisions.

34. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Financethe number of former Dail Eireann secretarieswho are likely to be eligible for a lump-sum pen-sion payout arising from the decision of the Cir-cuit Criminal Court on 3 February 2005 in thecase taken by a person (details supplied); theamount likely to be paid out; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7200/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As theDeputy is aware, the court case referred to relatesto the retirement lump sum of a person whoretired in 1997 under an arrangement reached in1997 for voluntarily early retirement. The courtheld that a lump sum in this case should be paid.The amount involved was \27,687.

I am informed by the Oireachtas Commissionthat there are up to 51 people in similar circum-stances. These will reach age 60 at various stagesover many years and may be entitled to retire-ment lump sums of differing amounts, relating totheir length of service, retirement salaries and payrates applying at the time each lump sumbecomes payable.

House Prices.

35. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Financethe percentage of the cost of a new house takenby the State in terms of taxation or levies; if thiscan amount to 40% of the purchase price; if hasplans to reduce the tax take in view of the seriouseconomic difficulties faced by many couples whentrying to buy a home; and if he will make a state-ment on the matter. [7205/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Govern-ment policy in the housing market has focused,among other things, on improving supply therebyassisting home ownership particularly for first-time buyers. In this context, the years 2002 and2003 were the eight and ninth successive years ofrecord housing output with 57,695 and 68,819completions respectively. This positive trend insupply has continued into 2004, with statistics forthe nine months to September showing that over-all house completions at 54,170 were up 13.4% onthe same period for the preceding year. The rateof house building is now more than double thatin 1996.

In addition, a range of tax incentives exist tofacilitate first-time buyers in purchasing their ownhomes. The Deputy will be aware that I intro-duced a stamp duty relieving measure in the 2005budget for first-time house purchasers who areowner-occupiers of second-hand houses byincreasing the stamp duty exemption thresholdfor such purchasers from \190,500 to \317,500and by having reduced rates for house values upto \635,000. The lowering of stamp duty rates forfirst-time buyers was designed to increase theaffordability of residential property for such buy-ers, thus helping them to get a foothold in theproperty market. It should be noted that allowner-occupiers are generally exempt fromstamp duty on new houses where the property is125 square metres or less, whereas an investorwho purchases a new house for renting is liablefor stamp duty where the price exceeds \127,000.

Mortgage interest relief is available at sourcein respect of interest paid on moneys borrowedfor the purchase, maintenance, repair or improve-ment of that taxpayer’s main residence, includingsecond-hand houses. For owner-occupiers, mort-gage interest relief at the standard rate is grantedin respect of interest paid up to a ceiling on loansused for the purchase or improvement of a per-son’s sole or main residence. Preferentialarrangements exist for first-time buyers overother owner occupiers. The existing higher ceil-ings for first-time buyers on allowable interestwere increased in budget 2003 and currentlystand at \4,000 for a single person and \8,000 formarried couples and widowed persons. Theperiod for which these increased ceilings applywas extended from five years to seven years.

In relation to the tax take from new homes, theState finds it necessary to raise taxes from thisarea like all other goods and services. TheDeputy may wish to note that I dealt with theissue of the tax take from the price of a newhouse in a reply to a parliamentary question on23 November 2004. Figures in excess of 40% havebeen attributed by the house building industry tothe amount that the Government raises in taxfrom each new home. However, this figure iswrong. In fact, based on the same industry fig-ures, the cost of a new home that accrues directlyto the Exchequer through taxation is more like28%, based on both Dublin and national prices.


[Mr. Cowen.]This is broadly in line with the tax take on theoverall economy.

Basic Income Scheme.

36. Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister forFinance if he will provide his Department’s cost-ing for the implementation of a basic incomescheme. [7068/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): My Depart-ment did not produce the costing for the imple-mentation of a basic income scheme.

The examination of the issues involved in intro-ducing a basic income scheme was undertaken bythe steering group on basic income which wasestablished as part of a commitment in Partner-ship 2000 for Inclusion, Employment and Com-petitiveness. The group which was chaired by theTaoiseach’s Department was composed of rep-resentatives of all four pillars of social partner-ship, as well as relevant Government Depart-ments including the Department of Finance. Thegroup commissioned a number of reports and fin-ished its work in March 2001. The group’s workcontributed to the development of the Govern-ment’s Green Paper on Basic Income, which waspublished in September 2002.

Tax Code.

37. Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister forFinance if his Department has obtained an exten-sion to the one-month deadline set by the Euro-pean Commission regarding Ireland’s commentson the nature of the stallion tax relief; the date ofthe new deadline; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7067/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Officialsfrom my Department and the Department ofAgriculture and Food met with officials from theCommission Directorate General for Agricultureand Rural Development on 23 February 2005. Atthis meeting, the Commission agreed to extendthe deadline to respond to their letter of 6January 2005 to the end of March.


38. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Financeif he is satisfied that there are adequate pro-cedures in place within the financial and bankingsectors; if he has plans to improve or strengthensuch procedures; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7146/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The CentralBank and Financial Services Authority of IrelandAct 2003 established the Irish Financial ServicesRegulatory Authority. The post of consumerdirector is specifically provided for within thestructure of the financial regulator establishedunder that Act. The director exercises importantconsumer protection powers under legislation.

The Central Bank and Financial Services Auth-ority of Ireland Act 2004, complemented the 2003

Act, further enhanced the financial regulator’spowers and strengthened the regulatory envir-onment. This Act conferred new powers on thefinancial regulator to impose stiff administrativepenalties, to be applied where there is a breachof: any financial services legislation; codes of con-duct issued by the regulator; or any condition,requirement or direction imposed under legis-lation or codes.

The Act provided for an enhanced structure fordealing with consumers who have complaintsabout financial institutions and also provides con-sumer and industry consultative panels for thefinancial regulator. The consumer panel will havean important role in ensuring that the regulatoris correctly reflecting the interests of consumersin its protective — issue of codes of conduct —and educational — information pamphlets etc. —roles. The Act also established a single statutoryFinancial Services Ombudsman for all financialservices firms. The ombudsman’s office is due tobegin operations on 1 April 2005. The FinancialOmbudsman will have power to order redress inappropriate circumstances.

The Consumer Credit Act 1995, which com-menced in May 1996, regulates the provision ofconsumer credit. It prescribes inter alia the formand content of credit agreements for consumerlending, including in the case of loans secured onthe family home a requirement to warn the bor-rower about the risk of losing their home. TheAct also provides for the regulation of fees andcharges imposed by credit institutions.

In addition to the specific regulatory require-ments under the Central Bank and ConsumerCredit legislation, credit institutions are also sub-ject to specific requirements to know theircustomers, keep records and report suspicions ofmoney laundering under criminal justice legis-lation. Their professional advisers, such asaccountants and solicitors, are also subject tothese reporting requirements. All companies aresubject to the enhanced company law regime thathas been put in place in recent years, includingthe oversight role of the Director of CorporateEnforcement.

I am satisfied that the provisions now availablein law provide not just for the effective regulationof the way that credit institutions conduct theirbusiness but also for effective supervision andenforcement of the law where necessary. I amopen to making suitable amendments to the law,if the need arises. In this regard I have asked thefinancial regulator to advise me as soon as poss-ible if anything emerges from recent devel-opments in relation to asset based lending that intheir view would require a legislative change. Theforthcoming Bill to consolidate and moderniseour financial services legislation could offer asuitable vehicle for such amendments.

Tax Collection.

39. Mr. English asked the Minister for Financeif he is satisfied with the provisions for dealing


with overpayment of taxation; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7106/05]

42. Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Fin-ance if the Revenue Commissioners will under-take a major proactive public information cam-paign, including radio and television advertising,to advise taxpayers of overpaid taxes orunclaimed tax relief; if the Revenue Commis-sioners will liaise with other State bodies whichhold information which might facilitate theidentification of taxpayers who have unclaimedreliefs; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7174/05]

72. Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Finance ifhe plans to introduce reforms to encouragepeople to claim back overpaid PAYE tax.[7062/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I proposeto take Questions Nos. 39, 42 and 72 together.

I am informed by the Revenue Commissionersthat a wide range of initiatives have already beentaken to inform PAYE taxpayers of their entitle-ments to tax credits-reliefs and so avoid over-payments of tax.

Revenue inform me that the vast majority ofPAYE workers receive their full entitlementsevery year. At the beginning of each year a taxcredit certificate is issued to every PAYE tax-payer and this reflects the most up-to-date infor-mation that Revenue has regarding an individ-ual’s entitlements. Revenue completed the issueof 2.24 million such certificates for 2005 in mid-February. Each certificate was accompanied by asimple but comprehensive leaflet giving fulldetails of the credits-reliefs to which a taxpayermay be entitled including: main personal tax cred-its available for the year in question with com-parative figures for the preceding year; tax ratesand tax bands for the year in question; exemptionlimits for single, widowed and married persons;and how to claim an adjustment to the tax creditcertificate.

Revenue uses media advertising on a regularand systematic basis to acquaint taxpayers abouttheir entitlements and to encourage them to claimthese. In relation to the PAYE community inparticular there is extensive advertising of thebudget provisions each year including a Revenuefree-phone service which operates for two daysimmediately following the budget. Again whenthe tax credit certificates are being issued duringJanuary and February each year a newspaper andradio campaign is run to alert people to this.

In February 2005, Revenue launched a newself-service option for PAYE taxpayers. This ser-vice allows PAYE employees to claim, using theInternet, text messaging or the lo-call 1890 tele-phone number, age credits for those over 65, ser-vice charges and trade union subscriptions. It alsoallows them to request a Form 12 — return ofincome, Med 1 — medical expenses claim, P50 —unemployment claim and Rent 1 — rent relief.These facilities were widely advertised in the

media and were included in the information leaf-let issued with the tax credit certificates for 2005.

Revenue also publishes a wide range of claimforms, leaflets and guides on all PAYE creditsand reliefs including: IT1 — tax credits, reliefsand rates for 2004 and 2005; IT2 — taxation ofmarried persons; IT3 — what to do about taxwhen you separate; IT6 — health-medicalexpenses relief; MED 1 — health expenses claimform; IT8 — tax exemption and marginal relief;IT9 — one parent family tax credit; IT11 —employee’s guide to PAYE; IT18 — incapaci-tated child allowance; IT27 — tax relief for ser-vice charges; IT31 — tax relief for tuition fees;IT35 — blind persons allowances and reliefs; IT45— tax credits and relief’s for over 65’s; IT46 —dependent relative tax credit; and IT47 —employed person taking care of incapacitatedindividual.

All of these forms and information leaflets canbe downloaded and printed from the Revenuewebsite or ordered on-line. There is also a 24-hour telephone number available, 1890 30 67 06,for requesting forms or leaflets.

Revenue is currently undertaking a very com-prehensive review of the PAYE system and in thelatter part of this year will begin the roll-out of aredesigned system which will allow taxpayers to:access their Revenue records over the internet toascertain allowances-credits given and details ofpay and tax; amend their tax credit details overthe Internet, that is claim an allowance-credit noton record or to change the amount involved foran existing relief; and request an on-line reviewof their liability or a balancing statement, basedon the details available on the Revenue record,including where amended in relation to entitle-ments. This will give taxpayers a greater controlover their tax affairs and let them check whetherthey have claimed their full entitlements.

Revenue also engages from time to time in tar-geted media campaigns on particular issues. Tworecent examples of such campaigns relate to thefour-year time limit for claiming repayments,which encouraged taxpayers to ensure they madeclaims within the required time frame, andinforming taxpayers about the reliefs available tothose supporting relatives in nursing homes.

Revenue already liaises with other State bodiesand private institutions to facilitate the grantingof credits-reliefs to PAYE taxpayers. Forexample, liaison in relation to the tax relief atsource system which was introduced a number ofyears ago and which ensures that all thoseentitled to mortgage and medical insurancereliefs get these reliefs at source and do not haveto make a claim to Revenue, and service charges,where payment information is received from cer-tain local authorities, which is used in such casesto give a credit to the individual PAYE taxpayerconcerned, there is an ongoing exchange of infor-mation between Revenue and the Department ofSocial and Family Affairs in regard to certain tax-able payments made by that Department to


[Mr. Cowen.]PAYE employees. This interaction will beenhanced considerably through the more timelyexchange of information when the redesignedPAYE system already referred to is rolled out inthe latter part of this year.

I am accordingly satisfied that Revenue isalready very pro-active in the manner in whichthey ensure that PAYE taxpayers are madeaware of their entitlements and facilitated inclaiming these. Revenue will keep the issue underconstant review and take whatever steps arenecessary in relation to public information cam-paigns so as to continue to inform taxpayers oftheir entitlements and to simplify as far as poss-ible the arrangements for making these claims. Iemphasise, however, that the primary responsi-bility for ensuring that Revenue has the most upto date information on a taxpayers affairs lieswith the taxpayer.

House Prices.

40. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Finance ifhe is satisfied that the price of homes bought byfirst time buyers in Dublin will benefit from therecent stamp duty concession; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7099/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As theDeputy will be aware, the 2005 budget introduceda stamp duty relieving measure for first-timehouse purchasers who are owner-occupiers ofsecond-hand houses by increasing the stamp dutyexemption threshold for such purchasers from\190,500 to \317,500 and by having reduced ratesfor house values up to \635,000.

This relieving measure will further assistaffordability for first-time buyers and will helpsome first-time buyers to afford a starter homewho might not otherwise be able to do so. It willalso help to open the second-hand market moreto first-time buyers who had been increasinglydeterred by the impact of stamp duty. The cur-rent high levels of housing output, coupled withthe fact that the reductions have been confinedto the first time buyer segment of the market,should lessen the risk of the measure causing anincrease in house prices. The reductions in stampduty for second hand houses should remove dis-tortion between the new and second-handmarkets for first-time buyers by reducing thedegree of concentration of first time buyerdemand on the new house market.


41. Mr. Noonan asked the Minister for Financeif he plans to undertake a study of the impact ofthe maturity of SSIAs on the economy; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7095/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The matteris subject to ongoing study within myDepartment.

The impact of maturing SSIA funds on con-sumer demand in 2006 and 2007 is difficult to esti-

mate and will depend on how the accumulatedsavings are spent or saved, how that portion of anindividual’s income that was previously saved inSSIAs is used, and the extent to which savings arerolled over into other investment products. Theeconomic effect will also depend on the state ofthe economy in 2007 when the bulk of SSIAfunds — around 55% — mature. To date anumber of reports have been prepared regardingthe impact of the SSIAs by, among others, Good-body Stockbrokers, Lansdowne MarketResearch, the Irish Mortgage Corporation andthe Bank of Ireland. However, there is no consen-sus in these reports as to how these funds may beused. It is inevitable that there will be a lot ofuncertainty about the likely outcomes. As ascheme such as the SSIA has not existed pre-viously, it is not possible to draw on experienceas a basis for anticipating the impact the maturingaccounts will have on the economy.


Tax Code.

43. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Financeif his Department has concluded its considerationof the letter from the Commission DirectorateGeneral for Agriculture and Rural Developmentadvising that it had come to a preliminary opinionthat the stallion tax exemption scheme wouldseem to constitute an aid that was not compatiblewith the Common Market; if a reply has beensubmitted; if an extension of the one month dead-line for reply has been agreed by the Com-mission; the details of the amount he has submit-ted to the Commission of the estimate for 2003of the stallion income exempted by the scheme;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7147/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The Irishauthorities have yet to conclude their consider-ation of the letter of 6 January 2005 from theCommission Directorate General for Agricultureand Rural Development and a reply to the Com-mission’s letter has not yet issued. Officials frommy Department and the Department of Agri-culture and Food met with Commission officialson 23 February 2005. At this meeting, the Com-mission agreed to extend the deadline to respondto the end of March.

In relation to the cost of the exemption, in theCommission’s letter of 20 April 2004, the Com-mission sought, inter alia, information on theamounts concerned. If no detailed official statis-tics can be provided, then the Irish authorities arerequested to give best estimates on statistics onthe number of holdings concerned, the number ofstallion nominations performed, the relevant taxbrackets, and the regular price paid for suchnominations.

In response, the Commission was informed bythe Irish authorities that, as the measure rep-resented exempt income, there has been no


requirement in the past on those claiming theexemption to supply any information to the Rev-enue Commissioners of details of the amount ofincome involved. Therefore, the informationrequested on the cost was not available.

The Commission was also informed that thisposition changed with the introduction throughsection 33 of the 2003 Finance Act of an amend-ment to section 231 of the Taxes ConsolidationAct 1997 which provided that the profits, gains orlosses arising in this regard must be included inthe annual return of income for the taxpayer eventhough the income or gains are exempt from tax.This requirement applies in respect of chargeableperiods commencing on or after 1 January 2004.The Commission was also informed that thisinformation, which will not be available in fulluntil early 2006, will enable more reliable infor-mation to be determined as to the cost or other-wise to the Irish Exchequer of the exemption.Other statistical estimates as requested by theCommission in relation to numbers of stallions,numbers of stallion farms, nominations and feeranges were obtained from industry sources andwere provided to the Commission in addition tothe tax rates applicable. However, this could notgive the cost of the exemption as this can only beobtained on the basis of the individual returns foreach taxpayer claiming the exemption.

Subsequently, a copy of the report by IndeconInternational Economic Consultants, Assessmentof the Economic Contribution of the Thorough-bred Breeding and Horse Racing Industry inIreland, was sent to the Commission at end Sep-tember 2004. As has been widely reported, thatreport contained an estimate that the Exchequercost of the exemption was in the region of \3 mill-ion which was based on the consultants’ ownresearch and analysis. It was not an estimate pre-pared by the Irish authorities.

44. Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Financethe reason he opposed the initiative by his EUcolleagues, including France, Germany, the Presi-dency and the Commission to introduce an avi-ation fuel tax to fund poverty relief in Sub-Saharan Africa. [7059/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): At the mostrecent meeting of EU Finance Ministers on 17February, there was a lunchtime discussion aboutexploring the possibility of introducing a tax onaviation fuel or a levy on airline tickets for thepurposes of raising revenue for development aid.Opinions differed on the wisdom of such anapproach.

Following this discussion, the European Com-mission was asked to examine the pros and consof possible approaches for the financing ofdevelopment aid, including the suggestionsreferred to above. At that stage we will be in aposition to better assess the impact of any suchproposal from an Irish perspective.

I have not opposed any proposal as no detailedproposal has yet been made.


45. Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Financehis views on the Report on Competition in Bank-ing recently published by the Competition Auth-ority. [7102/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Inresponding to the Deputy, I should, perhaps, firstclarify the context in which the recent report waspublished and the views of interested partiessought thereon.

The report published by the CompetitionAuthority last December was one which had beenprepared for it by a firm of consultants. Whileendorsing the analysis in the report, the authorityhas not yet taken a position on the findings inthe report. It is only after it has considered theresponses to the current consultation exercisethat the authority will issue its own report andrecommendations, probably around mid-2005.Given these circumstances, the response which Isent to the Authority was a preliminary one. Thiswill be reviewed in the light of the finalisation ofthe authority’s own position in relation to theissues raised in the report.

The report which was published containedsome forty recommendations, but only a smallnumber of these were actually addressed to myDepartment. A particular focus of interest for myDepartment related to stamp duty on “plastic”cards. The recommendations on this topic dealtwith the issue of the double stamp duty burdenon persons in a year in which they switched cardproviders, or up-graded or down-graded thestatus of the card provided by their existingsupplier.

I had already indicated in my budget speechlast December that I would take steps to elimin-ate this double charge and section 120 of the Fin-ance Bill 2005 provides accordingly. It amendsPart 9 of the Stamp Duties Consolidation Act1999 to provide for an exemption from a secondor subsequent charge to stamp duty for financialcards such as credit cards, charge cards, ATMcards, Laser cards and combined cards arisingfrom the switching of accounts within a financialinstitution, or from one financial institution toanother, in the same year of charge. The changein relation to credit cards and charge cards willtake effect from 2 April 2005, while the change inrelation to ATM cards, Laser cards and combinedcards will take effect from 1 January 2006.

A second area of particular interest to myDepartment in the report concerned the recom-mendation that the regulation of non-interestbank charges be phased out. As pointed out inthe response which I forwarded to the authority,the regulation of non-interest charges and fees isaimed at consumer protection. It facilitatesIFSRA both to verify that notified charges are infact being applied to customer transactions andto require restitution in the event of over-charging. A reconsideration of the presentarrangements would be warranted only in thecontext of a compelling case being made that


[Mr. Cowen.]these provisions significantly deter new entrantsto the markets for these banking products, or thatthe effectiveness of competition in the sector isconsiderably increased.

There were some other issues in the report formy Department, to which I have also responded.I am arranging to have the full text of theresponse placed on my Department’s website.

As to my own views in the matter, I welcomedthe report when it was published. The approachof putting the consultants’ views forward for dis-cussion is an interesting one. As I said, when theauthority takes its own position on the variousissues I will consider the matter further.



Tax Code.

48. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Financethe progress made to date with regard to hisreview of tax reliefs and exemptions for high ear-ners; if consultants have now been appointed toassist in this process; when he expects the processto be completed; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7152/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Iannounced in my Budget Statement that myDepartment and the Office of the Revenue Com-missioners will undertake a detailed review ofcertain tax incentive schemes and tax exemptionsin 2005. This review will evaluate their impactand operation including their economic and socialbenefits for the different locations and sectorsinvolved and to the wider community. In additionthe review will examine the degree to which theseschemes allow high-income individuals to reducetheir tax liabilities.

I subsequently announced in a press release on6 January 2005 that my Department had adver-tised for external consultants to review certain taxincentive schemes. Tenders were invited fromsuitably qualified consultants to undertake twoseparate studies in economic, fiscal and socialterms, as necessary, of the impact, operation,effectiveness and cost of fifteen separate taxincentive schemes. The request for tenders wasplaced in the Official Journal of the EuropeanUnion on 24 December 2004. Seven tenders haverecently been received in my Department anddecisions on the award of the contracts will betaken by the end of this month. It is envisagedthat the consultancy review of these variousreliefs will be completed by end July 2005.

The review of tax reliefs also includes a specialpublic consultation process seeking submissionson measures that could be introduced to balancethe benefit of such reliefs with the extent to whichthese are used by high-earners to reduce their taxbill. The public consultation was advertised on 8

January 2005 and submissions should be made tomy Department before 31 March 2005.

The review will also involve the examinationby my Department and the Revenue Commis-sioners of certain other tax exemptions, forexample, for stallions, woodlands, artists and pat-ent income. I would welcome the views of publicrepresentatives, either individually or via theforum of the relevant Oireachtas committees andof the social partners in due course in relation toall these matters.

The aim is to have all these examinations com-pleted by the autumn so that the various issuescan be examined in the context of the 2006budget next December.


50. Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Finance ifhe has considered and costed charity tax reformas proposed by the ICTRG. [7061/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): In the con-text of this year’s Finance Bill, the Irish CharitiesTax Reform Group, ICTRG, has proposed areduction in the minimum threshold fordonations qualifying for tax relief from \250 to\100 and an extension of the current donationsscheme to cover gifts of non-cash assets. Inaddition, the group has proposed the introductionof a VAT refund scheme for charities.

I have considered the issues raised but am notprepared to reduce the minimum amount at thistime. The relief is already very generous, being atthe taxpayer’s marginal rate of tax. This could beas high as 42% for an individual donor. In suchcases, the value of the donation is increased by72% as a result of the tax relief. A reduction inthe minimum qualifying donation would have theeffect of increasing the numbers of donationsqualifying for relief and could therefore be verycostly to the Exchequer.

Regarding the donation of non-cash items, theposition is that where an asset is donated to aneligible charity, the donation for capital gains tax,CGT, purposes is deemed to be such that neithera gain nor loss accrues to the donor on the dis-posal. Therefore, no tax charge arises in respectof such a donation and any gain on a subsequentdisposal of the asset by the charity is not a charge-able gain provided it is applied for charitable pur-poses only. Income tax relief on the value of anasset donated as proposed by the ICTRG,together with the current CGT exemption, wouldamount to a double relief. Such a concessioncould result in tax relief being granted which waswell beyond the top rate of income tax.

In addition, the means whereby the relief iscurrently given in the case of a PAYE donor pre-supposes that the individual is making thedonation from income on which he or she haspaid income tax to the value of the relief beingclaimed. While there is some prospect that this isso when the donation is in the form of money,


such a link may be broken where non-cash itemsare involved.

I very much appreciate the valuable work doneby charities for the benefit of the community atlarge. I also understand the desire of the ICTRGto have the minimum qualifying thresholdreduced still further and for the relief to beextended to non-cash items. However, theExchequer is responding very generously in thepresent climate to the voluntary sector. In the cir-cumstances, therefore, I do not consider thechanges proposed are merited at this time. It isnot possible to provide an estimate of the cost ofthe ICTRG proposals on the donations schemebut they would have significant implications forthe Exchequer.

With regard to the ICTRG’s proposal for theintroduction of a VAT refund scheme for chari-ties, charities and non-profit groups are governedby EU VAT law with which Irish VAT law mustcomply. Charities are exempt from charging VATon the services they provide and cannot recoverVAT incurred on goods and services they pur-chase. Essentially, only VAT-registered busi-nesses which charge VAT are able to recoverVAT. Accordingly, I have no plans to make anychanges to the VAT treatment of charities.


National Minimum Wage.

52. Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Fin-ance the number of persons on the national mini-mum wage who are expected to be brought backinto the tax net if the increase to \7.65 per week,as recommended by the Labour Court, isimplemented; and if he will make a statement onthe matter. [7154/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I remindthe Deputy it was this Government that intro-duced the minimum wage to protect low paidworkers and which, over the last eight budgets,removed a record number of some 459,500workers from the tax net.

The wage is \15,515 on an annualised basis,based on a 39-hour week. The income tax thres-hold is \14,250 per annum. The Revenue Com-missioners estimate there will be approximately37,300 income earners in this annual incomerange in 2005 who will pay some small amount oftax if the new minimum wage is implemented.Some of these are likely to be workers on theminimum wage working full time, while othersare likely to be workers on higher wage ratesworking shorter hours. This estimate is pro-visional and likely be revised. A married couplewho has elected or has been deemed to haveelected for joint assessment is counted as onetax unit.

Tax Code.

53. Mr. Costello asked the Minister for Finance

his views on the recent suggestions that high-income earners who are paid more than \200,000per year should pay a minimum 20% tax; if heintends to take steps to ensure a minimum taxcontribution from high earners; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7150/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The Deputyis aware of my announcement in budget 2005 thatmy Department, in conjunction with the RevenueCommissioners, will undertake a detailed reviewof certain tax incentive schemes and tax exemp-tions this year. There are a number of elementsto the review which is already under way. It willevaluate the impact and operation of certainincentive schemes and exemptions including theireconomic and social benefits for the differentlocations and sectors involved and to the widercommunity. It will include external consultancywork on the evaluation of property-based taxincentive schemes and examine the degree towhich these schemes allow high-income individ-uals to reduce their tax liabilities.

As well as examining relevant internationalapproaches, the review will also include a consul-tation process seeking submissions on measuresthat could be introduced to balance the benefit ofsuch reliefs and the extent to which such incen-tives and exemptions are used by high earners toreduce their tax bill. One such measure to beexamined will be the concept of a minimumincome tax.

Until this review of tax incentives and exemp-tions is complete and I have considered thematter, I do not propose to make any commenton the steps I may take in this area.

Non-Resident Accounts.

54. Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Financethe number of persons, companies and trustsbeing investigated by the Revenue Commis-sioners arising from the Ansbacher accounts atthe latest date for which figures are available; thenumber of cases in which settlements have beenagreed; the amount paid; the number of cases stilloutstanding; if additional action has been takenby the Revenue Commissioners arising from thereport of the Ansbacher inspectors; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7189/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I amadvised by the Revenue Commissioners that theirAnsbacher review team has inquired into 289cases to date, 109 of which have been finalised.The 289 cases, taking account of spouses and con-nected companies, consist of 300 names. They aremade up of 179 cases listed on the High Courtinspectors’ report and 110 similar cases dis-covered by Revenue or listed on the authorisedofficer’s report.

A total of 211 cases have been under activeinvestigation. The remaining cases consist of 62non-resident persons, including 17 former Irishresidents, 12 individuals who claimed the 1993amnesty provisions and four cases with insuf-


[Mr. Cowen.]ficient identity information. The investigationincludes examining the tax position of disclosedentities and accumulating and assembling infor-mation on other connected entities. The numberof connected entities in regard to cases underinvestigation is now almost 700. Revenue is mak-ing extensive use of its legislative powers to seekbooks, records, documents and information in thecases being investigated. Where appropriate,prosecutions will be considered but these willdepend on the level of evidence available. Rev-enue has made six successful applications to the

Cases \ million

Cases involving Ansbacher or Ansbacher type arrangements 77 cases 36.22

Other cases involving offshore funds or deposits 18 cases 9.31

Total 95 cases 45.53

The 109 cases which have been finalised consistof 66 cases which were settled on payments of\35.62 million, included in the amount above, 26non-resident cases which are covered by the pro-visions of double taxation agreements and 17which had no additional liability, of which twowere covered by the 1993 amnesty provisions.

Revenue made an application under section 11of the Companies Act 1990 for a copy of the HighCourt inspectors’ report. This was made availableto Revenue on 6 July 2002. The information inthis report has been carefully considered asregards the tax liabilities of the persons con-cerned. In addition, Revenue made a furtherapplication to the High Court for access to thesupporting papers to the High Court inspectors’report. Judgment was delivered by the presidentof the High Court in May 2004 to allow access todocuments relating to clients of Ansbachernamed in the report and those persons and com-panies found by the High Court inspectors tohave failed to co-operate with their inquiry.

The judgment also allows for Revenue to makeapplication and grounding affidavit for theobtaining of information and documents relatingto any other individual or company. Access todocuments is subject to the direction of the HighCourt. The High Court orders in the matter weregranted in June 2004 and perfected in January2005. Revenue has applied on foot of the ordersfor access to documentation in respect of certaincases named in the High Court inspectors’ report.The documentation is awaited.

Revenue has informed me the investigationsare time-consuming and complex and are likelyto continue for some time to come.


55. Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Finance ifhe is satisfied that penalties for non-compliancein the banking sector are adequate in view of therecent investigations of non-compliance at banks(details supplied). [7087/05]

High Court for the production by financial insti-tutions and third parties of books, records andother documentation, which are relevant to liab-ilities of Ansbacher account holders. Some200,000 documents have been received under theterms of the High Court orders. Advanced invest-igative computer software is used in controllingand managing the documentation.

To date a total of \45.53 million has beenreceived, consisting of settlements and paymentson account, in respect of 95 cases. This is detailedin the following table.

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The level ofpenalties to be applied in the case of certain taxevasion by the banking sector was addressed inthe Finance Act 2002, following recommend-ations made by the Committee of PublicAccounts. As a result, heavier tax-geared penal-ties can now be applied in circumstances wherefixed penalties were previously applied. As theDeputy is aware, the Revenue Commissionerswere given additional powers by my predecessorin the Finance Act 1999 to enable them to carryout on-site audits in financial institutions therebyincreasing the prospect of detection and reducingthe prospect of non-compliance.

I am satisfied the powers available to the Rev-enue Commissioners and the sanctions that maybe applied in cases involving non-compliance arebroadly adequate. The Law Reform Com-mission’s recent report on a fiscal prosecutor anda revenue court and last year’s report of the Rev-enue Powers Group both provide reassurance inthis regard.


56. Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Fin-ance if the Government has plans to encouragethe productive use of money that will be releasedinto the economy when the SSIAs mature; ifthere are plans for any further scheme to encour-age saving; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7195/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The SSIAscheme opened on 1 May 2001 and entry to itclosed on 30 April 2002. The accounts are due tomature between May 2006 and April 2007 at theend of the five-year period. A total of 1.17 millionaccounts were opened during the period outlined.

The specific goal of the SSIA scheme was toencourage people to save over a period of at leastfive years. Its effect has been to stimulate suchsavings over varying income ranges as evident inthe extensive take-up by many low-income ear-


ners. The scheme has been a success in thoseterms.

The scheme has a specific duration. Any pro-posals for new savings schemes to replace theSSIA scheme would be considered as part of thenormal annual budgetary process taking accountof public policy objectives and Exchequer costimplications. The use to which the moneys arisingon maturity of the SSIAs are put is ultimately amatter for the individual account holder.

Public Private Partnerships.

57. Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Financethe changes he plans to make in the PPP processto achieve the new targets for expenditure.[7118/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I refer theDeputy to my answer to a parliamentary questionput by Deputy Gerard Murphy on Tuesday, 1February 2005, reference number 2536/05, wher-ein I provided the following information.

Public private partnerships, PPPs, are part ofthe overall strategy to deliver on investmentpriorities. The Government is committed todeveloping the PPP process as a viable procure-ment option for appropriate projects. There hasbeen good progress on PPPs overall since the firstgroup of pilot projects were announced in 1999.Reasonable deal flow has been established in theroads and environment areas but progress inregard to projects remunerated by unitary pay-ments from the Exchequer has been slower. Weare still learning and continue to keep our pro-cesses and procedures under review.

The multi-annual capital envelopes introducedin budget 2004 set ambitious targets for invest-ment funded by PPPs and the National Develop-ment Finance Agency, NDFA. After the firstyear of operation, it was clear that not all the firstset of targets for PPPs to be remunerated by uni-tary payments would be met in the short term.There are a number of reasons for this, includingthe complexity of the process and a lead time of18 months to two years in bringing PPP projectsto construction.

Adjustments to the targets were made inbudget 2005 to take account of the shortfall in2005 and to accommodate the situation in theshort to medium term. The total PPP-NDFA allo-cation for 2005 to 2009, remunerated by unitarypayments from Departments’ Votes, is \3.675billion. In addition, a target of \1.195 billion forPPPs remunerated by user charges has been set.

PPPs should not replace traditional methodswhere these are considered more suited to theindividual project or projects under consider-ation. However, the PPP procurement option hasan important role to play when applied to appro-priate projects where there is the right scale, riskand operational profile to harness the benefits ofthis new approach. PPPs are acknowledged to becomplex, involving a long-term financial commit-ment for both the private and public sector part-ners for a period of anything up to 30 years.

The challenge for the future is to ensure theappropriate skills and capacity are in place,together with balanced and proportionate pro-cedures for appraisal, assessment and evaluationof proposals, which will facilitate the selection ofPPP projects offering quality public services,value for money and timely delivery. My Depart-ment is actively considering what changes, if any,are appropriate.


58. Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Fin-ance if his Department or any agency under itsaegis is carrying out an investigation into com-panies (details supplied); and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7181/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): My Depart-ment is not carrying out an investigation into anyof the companies named. Since this is an oper-ational matter, it is for the Revenue Commis-sioners to decide what action should be taken incases that come to their attention. For oper-ational reasons it would not be appropriate tocomment further.

The role of the Minister for Finance in regardto financial regulation is to bring forward legislat-ive proposals whereby the duly empowered finan-cial regulator, IFSRA, can supervise and regulatethe financial sector in accordance with thosepowers. IFSRA is independent in the exercise ofits powers.

I am, however, open to making suitable amend-ments to the law if the need arises. In this regard,I have asked the financial regulator to advise meas soon as possible if anything emerges fromrecent developments in regard to asset-basedlending that would require legislative change. Theforthcoming Bill to consolidate and moderniseour financial services legislation will offer a suit-able vehicle for such amendments.


59. Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Finance ifhe has satisfied himself with regard to thenumbers of persons from within State agencieswho have indicated a willingness to decentralisewith their agencies; and his views on the assess-ments from some of the agencies of the risk ofdamage to delivery of services. [7131/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I acceptthat the number of applications to the centralapplications facility, CAF, from the Civil Serviceare much better than those from State agencies.Unlike the State agencies, the Civil Service hasconsiderable previous experience of decentralis-ation and has a long tradition of inter-departmental transfers.

The decentralisation implementation groupasked that all organisations participating in theprogramme should prepare detailed implemen-tation plans including risk mitigation strategies.These plans were prepared and submitted to thegroup and most included risk mitigation stra-


[Mr. Cowen.]tegies. In its July 2004 report, the group notedthat the overall quality of the plans was good. Ithas recommended, in paragraph 9.3, that in pre-paring the next version of their implementationplans, each organisation should ensure a risk miti-gation strategy is included. I am satisfied this rep-resents a realistic approach to risk identificationand mitigation.

Tax Collection.

60. Ms Lynch asked the Minister for Financethe number of breaches detected of the Waiverof Certain Tax, Interest and Penalties Act 1993in respect of each year since 1994; the numberof prosecutions initiated and convictions securedarising from such detections; if he has satisfiedhimself the law is being applied in the mannerintended by the Oireachtas; if his attention hasbeen drawn to comments made by the chairmanof the Revenue Commissioners at the meeting ofthe Committee of Public Accounts on 2December 2004 in which he referred to the diffi-culties faced in initiating prosecution for breachesof the Act; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7158/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I amadvised by the Revenue Commissioners thatthere are two ways in which a taxpayer may havebeen in breach of the amnesty, either throughmaking a false declaration or through not makinga declaration. The Revenue Commissioners donot have figures for the number of detectedbreaches of the amnesty. The confidentiality con-ditions built into the 1993 amnesty legislationmake such breaches difficult to identify andprove.

Individuals and companies have been success-fully prosecuted in recent years as a result of Rev-enue investigations and, although these investi-gations have in some instances involvedconsideration of possible amnesty breaches, it hasnot generally been possible to obtain the evi-dence necessary to meet the required standardsof “beyond reasonable doubt” from an amnestyperspective. However, one individual has beensuccessfully prosecuted to date for failure to com-ply with the obligatory provisions of the Waiverof Certain Tax, Interest and Penalties Act 1993following a Revenue investigation and is awaitingsentence. There was a well-publicised convictionin the Circuit Criminal Court recently for taxoffences related to the amnesty and in Januarylast a six-month jail sentence was handed down.

Revenue’s criminal investigation programmeshave been refocused recently with the establish-ment of an investigations and prosecutions div-ision, one of the functions of which is to increasethe number of prosecutions for serious tax eva-sion. Many of the cases under investigation relateto tax offences committed in recent years and donot therefore involve consideration of amnestyissues. However, a number of cases have beenidentified which could involve offences in regard

to the amnesty and they will be investigated witha view to taking a criminal prosecution.

I am aware of the comments made by the chair-man of the Revenue Commissioners at the Com-mittee of Public Accounts in December 2004, inresponse to questions regarding the 2003 Reportof the Comptroller and Auditor General on theissue of the tax amnesty. He referred to theserious difficulties the Revenue Commissionershad in obtaining admissible evidence due to theconfidentiality safeguards enshrined in theamnesty legislation. He went on to say there weretwo cases coming before the courts in the nearfuture and that much would depend on the out-come of these as to whether the other cases beinginvestigated would go for prosecution. One ofthese is the successful Revenue conviction men-tioned earlier.

In view of this, I am satisfied the RevenueCommissioners are making every effort to ensurethe law is applied in the manner intended by thelegislation as passed by the Houses of theOireachtas. Deputies are aware the Finance Bill2005 contains important additions to the powersof the Revenue Commissioners to seek pros-ecutions, which will be of assistance in deterringand allowing the prosecution of future taxoffences.

61. Ms McManus asked the Minister for Fin-ance the progress made by his Department andthe Revenue Commissioners in their consider-ation of the recommendations of the RevenuePowers Group; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7186/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The Rev-enue Powers Group was established in March2003 to review Revenue’s main powers andrecommend changes. The group reported in late2003 and its report was published in February2004. At the time of publication of the report, thethen Minister for Finance indicated his intentionto allow a period for public debate and reflectionon many of the wide-ranging issues raised by therecommendations.

I have now considered the various recommend-ations and, in this year’s Finance Bill, initiatedthe first measures in a process of reforms in thearea of Revenue powers. The measures containedin the Bill represent a balanced package whichincludes some of the recommendations of theRevenue Powers Group. I intend to return tosome of the remaining recommendations, whichrequire further consultation and careful consider-ation, for future implementation. In this context,the recent report of the Law Reform Commissionon a fiscal prosecutor and a revenue court isalso relevant.

One of the measures proposed in the FinanceBill 2005 as a result of the Revenue PowersGroup Report is the increase in the publicationlimit for settlements with tax defaulters from\12,700 to \30,000. The limit of \12,700 has notbeen changed since it was first enacted in 1983


and if indexed according to the CPI would be ofthe order of \26,000. The RPG recommended alimit of \50,000 while the Law Reform Com-mission recommended a limit of \25,000. Theamendment provides that the limit be automati-cally revised every five years in line with the CPIto a rounded figure of the next \1,000.

The interest rate on underpaid tax will bereduced to a daily simple interest rate equivalentto 10% per annum for non-fiduciary taxes whileretaining the 11.75% rate for fiduciary taxes,which are collected and remitted on behalf ofothers, for example, VAT and PAYE. The Billalso provides for the repeal of the 2% per monthinterest charge for ‘fraud and neglect’ and the200% tax-geared penalty for fraud from a currentdate. However, both will remain on the StatuteBook for historical “legacy” cases.

Other recommendations of the group will alsobe administratively implemented or have alreadybeen implemented by the Revenue Commis-sioners. The Revenue Powers Group had con-cerns regarding the modalities of exchange ofinformation between Revenue and other agen-cies, especially the Office of the Director of Cor-porate Enforcement. Revenue and the ODCEhave recently concluded negotiations and signeda memorandum of understanding which will gov-ern this information exchange and largely meetsthe group’s concerns.

The targeting of audits will be continuallyimproved through greater focus on risk. Regional“powers officers” have been appointed withinRevenue to manage the use of powers in the newregions. Compliance costs will be reduced wher-ever possible and the cost of compliance will con-tinue to be weighed up when considering theintroduction of new powers. Revenue will aim toexamine records at the taxpayer’s premises wherethe removal of records would prevent the busi-ness carrying on in an orderly manner. Inaddition, Revenue will give more prominence tothe external reviewers and in future will havethem appointed using the Civil Service and LocalAppointments Commission.

I have also addressed a number of other issueswithin the general area of Revenue powers whichdid not arise from the recommendations of theRevenue Powers Group.

Budgetary Process Reform.

62. Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for Financethe reforms of the budgetary process to which healluded in his Budget 2005 speech. [7069/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I am con-tinuing to examine a number of options forchange which could be implemented in the shortand medium term. Any changes to the processwould need to meet best practice, improve boththe quality of debate and the data available to theHouse on the budget, meet our obligations to theEU and be capable of being delivered within theexisting budget timetable. Before I bring pro-posals to the House, I will discuss the possibilities

for change with my colleagues in Government. Atthat stage, I will bring proposals which the Housewill have an opportunity to discuss.

Garda Stations.

63. Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the position regarding the provision of a newGarda station at Castleisland, County Kerry.[5079/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): The Commissioners of PublicWorks recently identified a number of new siteoptions in the Castleisland area for a new Gardastation. Following preliminary assessment ofthese options, the commissioners have now short-listed a number of suitable sites for considerationby the Department of Justice, Equality and LawReform. On receipt of the views of the Depart-ment, the commissioners will commence theacquisition process.

Public Capital Programmes.

64. Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister for Financeif he will make a statement on the recently pub-lished guidelines for the appraisal and manage-ment of public capital programmes and pro-jects. [7202/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Therecently revised guidelines for the appraisal andmanagement of capital expenditure proposals inthe public sector are part of the Government’scontinuing commitment to maximising value formoney from public expenditure. They will com-plement the rolling multi-annual capital envel-opes introduced in budget 2004. The new guide-lines are designed to be rigorous in theirapproach to the management and evaluation ofcapital programmes and project appraisal andmanagement and to reflect best practice, whileintroducing greater proportionality into projectassessment. All projects under capital prog-rammes or included in business plans must besubject to project appraisal.

Under the revised guidelines, projects involv-ing minor refurbishment works, fit outs and so onwith a value of less than \0.5 million will undergoa simple assessment. Projects between \0.5 mill-ion and \5 million will be the subject of a singleappraisal, comprising elements of preliminaryappraisal to determine if a project justifies moredetailed consideration and detailed appraisal todetermine if a project should go to planning andimplementation stages.

A preliminary appraisal and a full detailedappraisal will be carried out for all projects cost-ing over \5 million. These larger projects willundergo a more sophisticated analysis with pro-jects over \50 million required to undergo a fullcost-benefit analysis at detailed appraisal stage.All capital programmes with an annual value inexcess of \50 million and of five years’ durationor more will, for the first time, be required to beevaluated at the beginning and mid-point of each


[Mr. Cowen.]five-year cycle, unless otherwise agreed by theDepartment of Finance. Formal structures for themonitoring and management of investment prog-rammes to include the appointment of a prog-ramme co-ordinator and a monitoring committeemust also be put in place.

The new guidelines also provide for a clearerdefinition of the respective roles and responsibil-ities of all involved in the management andappraisal of capital programmes and projects,Government, Ministers, the Department of Fin-ance, Departments and public bodies. Further-more, the guidelines contain the Department ofFinance general conditions of sanction to expen-diture under the capital envelopes. Under thegeneral conditions of sanction for the multi-annual capital envelopes, Departments arerequired to comply in all cases with my Depart-ment’s guidelines for the appraisal and manage-ment of capital projects. Under the Departmentof Finance general conditions of sanction to thecapital envelopes, Departments must put in placesystems to report regularly to their managementon the evaluation of projects prior to approval,the management of capital projects and progresson capital programmes. They must also arrangeto carry out spot-checks for compliance with thecapital appraisal guidelines and report on theseand on progress generally under their capitalenvelopes to the Department of Finance.

The NDP-CSF evaluation unit will review onbehalf of the Department of Finance the reportsfrom Departments on the spot checks for com-pliance. My Department will consider any recom-mendations from the unit in this regard and takeany necessary follow-up actions withDepartments.

House Prices.

65. Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister forFinance his views on the exposure of the econ-omy to reversals in the housing market; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7091/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): In the pastnumber of years there has been a sharp increasein housing output and it has become a highly sig-nificant sector of the economy. In 2003 housingconstruction accounted for just over 10% ofGNP. A gradual easing back of housing output isenvisaged in the coming years, although this isexpected to be offset by other components ofbuilding and construction, assisted by a continu-ation of a strong public capital programme, aswell as a continuation in the pick up in otherinvestment. Most commentators believe that theIrish housing market is underpinned by strongeconomic fundamentals and favourable demo-graphics must also be taken into account.

Tax Code.

66. Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Fin-ance the amount in corporation tax paid by the

banks and other financial institutions in the latestyear for which figures are available; his views onwhether this represents a fair return in regard tothe huge profits now being made, particularly bybanks; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7203/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I aminformed by the Revenue Commissioners that theestimated corporation tax paid in 2004 by banksand other financial institutions was of the orderof \1,300 million. This figure is significant, rep-resenting almost 25% of our total corporation taxtake of \5,334 million in 2004. This covers banks,their Irish subsidiaries, banking activities in theIFSC, insurance companies and building societies.The amount does not include foreign tax paid byIrish financial institutions in respect of their over-seas operations, which is likely to be significant.

As the Deputy will be aware the 12.5% corpor-ation tax rate enjoyed by companies in Ireland isa general measure which applies to a company’strading income. In this regard it would not beappropriate, under EU state aid rules, to imposea higher corporation tax rate on the profits of thebanking sector.

As the Deputy is no doubt also aware, the Fin-ance Act 2003 provides for a special three yearcontribution from the banking sector. This pro-vision has already yielded \206 million and alsoapplies for 2005.

67. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the Government’s position in relation to aproposal put forward by the European Com-mission that the proportion of value added taxcurrently paid into the Union budget by memberstates should be increased; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7148/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): There is infact no such proposal from the European Com-mission at this time. The Commission has invitedCouncil to discuss the options suggested by theCommission for direct EU taxation to fund, inpart at least, the Union budget from 2014onwards. In putting forward this suggestion, theCommission has identified VAT as one of threeoptions for that direct EU tax.

Currently, the EU budget is financed by tradit-ional own resources, mainly customs duties, anotional VAT resource whereby a common rateis applied to each member state’s harmonisedVAT base and a GNI related resource wherebya common rate is applied to each member state’sgross national income. The essence of the currentsystem is that the EU budget is mainly fundedby contributions from the member states, whoseunanimous agreement is needed to make anychange to the system.

In a report published last July, the Commissionconsidered a number of options in relation to thefuture financing of the EU budget. These weremaintaining the current system; abolishing thecurrent VAT resource in favour of greaterreliance on the GNI resource; or introducing a


direct EU tax to finance the budget. The directEU tax approach was favoured by the Com-mission, which proposed that it be introducedfrom 2014.

Three options for such a direct EU tax wereput forward by the Commission: A tax on energyconsumption; the application of an EU rate toactual national VAT bases; or a tax on corporateincome. While not expressing a distinct prefer-ence for any one of these options, the Com-mission noted that an EU tax on corporateincome would require the most preparatory work.

With specific regard to the VAT option, theCommission envisaged that this would beimplemented through an EU rate as part of thenational VAT rate paid by taxpayers and on thesame taxable base. The Commission suggestedthat the EU VAT and national VAT shouldappear as separate taxes on the invoice or receiptthat a taxable person provides to a customer. Itwas not envisaged by the Commission that theoverall VAT burden on citizens would increaseas the EU rate would be offset by an equivalentdecrease in the national rate.

Virtually all the member states, includingIreland, have clearly expressed their oppositionto a new direct EU tax to finance the budget. Intheir view, the current system is efficient, effec-tive and reasonably equitable though there mightbe some scope for improving matters on that lat-ter point. Debate has centred instead on the othertwo scenarios outlined by the Commission forfinancing of the budget. These are retaining thecurrent system or abolishing the current VATresource and going to a more emphatically GNIbased system. As they think the latter scenariowould be more equitable, transparent and admin-istratively less burdensome, Ireland and amajority of member states favour the more GNIbased option.

The final decision on the Commission’s pro-posals will form part of the agreement on thefuture financing of the EU for the period 2007-13. The current negotiations on future financingare due to conclude in a political agreement atthe European Council next June.

68. Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister for Financeif an assessment has been done of the likely impli-cations of the recent decision of the EuropeanCourt of Justice which found against the RevenueCommissioners’ interpretation of VAT rules oncanteen food sales; the anticipated loss to theExchequer as a result of the ruling; the amountthat it is likely that will have to be repaid; and ifhe will make a statement on the matter.[7201/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I assumethe Deputy is referring to the recent decision ofthe European Court of Justice concerning HotelScandic, a Swedish company which was about toprovide subsidised meals to its employees. Therehas been no European Court of Justice case

involving the Revenue Commissioners’ interpre-tation of VAT rules on canteen food sales.

In the Scandic case the European Court ofJustice found that VAT would be chargeable onlyon the price paid by employees for the subsidisedmeals. Ireland’s position is not the same as thatof Sweden. The charging rules in Ireland arebased on a different provision of the sixth VATdirective than that at issue in the Swedish case.Ireland’s rule is that the taxable amount inrespect of subsidised canteens is the cost of pro-viding the meals or the price paid by theemployees, whichever is the greater. Neverthe-less, the Revenue Commissioners are examiningthe details of the judgement to establish whetheror not it has any implications for the Irishposition.


69. Mr. P. McGrath asked the Minister for Fin-ance if an evaluation of the proposed decentralis-ation of Ordnance Survey Ireland has been pre-pared or presented to him; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7120/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): As stated inmy reply to Parliamentary Question No. 52 of 1February 2005, all organisations that aredecentralising, including Ordnance SurveyIreland, OSI, have prepared and submitted animplementation plan as requested by the decen-tralisation implementation group, DIG. This planincluded detailed material on all issues to beaddressed in terms of people, property and busi-ness planning and will be further developed asadditional information emerges. The plan alsoincorporates specific risk assessment and miti-gation strategies. The plan was circulated to allstaff and has been placed on the OSI intranet.

National Development Plan.

70. Ms O. Mitchell asked the Minister for Fin-ance his views on whether a review of the per-formance of the NDP would now be timely.[7079/05]

112. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the extent to which he views the nationaldevelopment plan being achievable within budgetand on time; the financial implications; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7423/05]


I would also refer the Deputies to my responseto Questions Nos. 23 and 82 of 1 February 2005.

A detailed evaluation of the National Develop-ment Plan 2000-2006 was conducted by the ESRIin 2003. The evaluation found that the NDP hasmade significant progress towards its objectivesof promoting continuing sustainable nationaleconomic and employment growth and of con-solidating and improving Ireland’s economiccompetitiveness. In particular, the ESRI foundthat the NDP will have a sustainable positive


[Mr. Cowen.]effect on competitiveness and the productivecapacity of the economy in the long term. It alsofound that NDP expenditure over the periodunder review raised the level of GNP by over 7%above what it would have been had the NDP notbeen undertaken and, in the long run, the levelof GNP will be approximately 3% higher. Thereal rate of return on NDP investment is around14%. More generally, the mid-term evaluationendorsed the strategy underpinning the NDP andits continuing relevance. Therefore, it is notnecessary to conduct a further review of the NDPat this juncture.

Most of the key infrastructure projects aredelivered through the economic and social infra-structure operational programme, ESIOP, whichaccounts for over \19 billion of the total\31billion spend on the NDP to date. It wasacknowledged some time ago that the NDP out-put targets under some headings would not beachieved and that the cost of the infrastructureprogramme would be ahead of initial targets. Thisis due to a variety of factors including initial costunderestimation, re-specification of projects andinflation. By the end of 2004 it is estimated thatthe Exchequer had contributed almost \3 billionmore on the ESIOP than initially planned.

The Government continues to provide invest-ment in infrastructure over the medium termbeyond the completion date of the current NDP.The multi-annual capital envelopes for 2005-2009provide for overall capital investment of \36.3billion; as a percentage of GNP this is a levelaround twice the European average. This level ofinvestment will ensure that by end 2006 invest-ment under the ESIOP will be greater than theinitial target and will fund a major enhancementof Ireland’s economic and social infrastructure upto and beyond the current NDP.

Fiscal Policy.

71. Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Fin-ance his policy for the development of the treat-ment of children in budgetary policy over thecoming two budgets. [7124/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): TheDepartment of Social and Family Affairs has theprimary role in the provision of financial supportin respect of children. Child benefit is the mainfiscal instrument through which such support isprovided. Child benefit provides support to allparents or guardians in their parenting role irres-pective of the parents’ economic or income statusand, as such, it does not contribute to employ-ment disincentives or poverty traps. In line withthis overall policy approach, the Governmentcommenced a major initiative to substantiallyincrease the rates of child benefit. With effectfrom next month, child benefit rates will have,since 2000, increased by almost \88 per month inrespect of the first and second qualifying childrenand by \106 per month for each subsequent child.This means that 92% of the target rates increases

announced in the budget of 2001 have now beendelivered and, as stated in my recent budgetspeech, I will complete the transition to a higherrate of child benefit in next year’s budget.

The social welfare system also providesadditional income support in respect of childrenby way of child dependant allowance increases toan underlying social welfare payment. Further-more, family income supplement provides incomesupport to families with children who are at workon low pay. One of the special initiatives underthe partnership Sustaining Progress agreement isconcerned with ending child poverty and, in thatcontext, the effectiveness of merging childdependant allowance with family income sup-plement to provide a seamless source of childincome support to low income families is beingexamined. NESC is undertaking this examinationand the outcome of this work will be taken intoaccount by relevant Departments in the formula-tion of future policy in this area.

In relation to childcare, the 2005 Estimatesprovide \43.799 million in current support and\39.633 million in capital grants for the equalopportunities childcare programme through theDepartment of Justice, Equality and Law ReformVote. The total number of new child care placesbeing created through this programme from thefunding allocated to date exceeds 33,500. It isexpected that progress will be maintained in 2006and 2007 during which it is estimated that afurther \96 million in current expenditure and\104 million in capital funding will be providedfor child care facilities through this Vote. Inaddition, the Government has also undertakenmeasures to favour the supply of child care placesby tax incentives to set up facilities and relieffrom benefit in kind taxation for free or subsi-dised child care provided by employers.


Tax Code.

73. Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Financeif he is satisfied that sufficient steps are beingtaken to combat tax evasion in view of the con-tinuing high level of settlements and in view ofthe large number of settlements reported by theRevenue Commissioners each quarter; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7156/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I am satis-fied that the Revenue Commissioners are pursu-ing a programme which is dealing in a very deter-mined way with tax evasion. The commissionersare taking an approach which, depending on thenature of the case, involves either a monetarysettlement and possible publication, or criminalinvestigation and prosecution. This combinedpolicy has yielded significant results.

In recent years, for example, Revenue specialinvestigations have yielded a total in excess of\1.6 billion. Revenue’s normal audit programmeeach year also continues to recover significant


tax, together with interest and penalties. For2004, in excess of \400 million was collected inthis audit programme in approximately 16,000cases.

Having regard to the extensive resourcesrequired and the very significant evidentialrequirements in prosecuting cases of serious taxevasion, the majority of cases are dealt with bymeans of monetary settlement. This involves pay-ment of the tax evaded, interest and penaltiesand, provided the case meets the criteria insection 1086 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997,publication of the details in Iris Oifigiuil. It isworth noting that in settlement cases the ultimatesum paid involves a penalty that can be equiv-alent to the tax evaded which, when combinedwith the public odium brought about by publi-cation, is regarded as a severe sanction.

The high level of settlements is a reflection ofthe targeted approach used by Revenue which isto focus its compliance resources on the areas andcases of highest risk.

I am informed by Revenue that they are prose-cuting an increasing number of cases of serioustax evasion each year. This work is dealt with intheir investigations and prosecutions division andrecent figures indicate that this new approach isproving successful. Currently 45 cases are underinvestigation for prosecution, eight cases are withthe DPP, directions to prosecute have beenreceived from the DPP in another four cases and

Year No. of Fines Imposed Custodial Sentence Details of Custodial SentenceCases (suspended in brackets)

1997 1 £635 Nil

1998 6 £42,854 2 (2) (a) six months (suspended)(b) two years (suspended)

1999 1 £19,046 Nil

2000 3 £952 2 (1) (a) two years (18 months onappeal)

(b) 12 months (suspended)

2001 4 £14,284 4 (2) (a) twelve months(b) six months (suspended),(c) six months (suspended),(d) three months

2002 3 \5,540 1 (1) six months (suspended)

2003 6 \29,365 Nil two years (suspended)

2004 1 \5,000 and 180 hours community service. 1 (1) three months suspended providedconvicted party completes 180hours community service

2005 4 1 case fined \10,800 and adjourned toawait report on suitability to serve 120hours community service in lieu of threemonths prison sentence. The otherthree cases are awaiting sentencing

Revenue has a very clear policy of prosecutingcases of serious tax evasion. This function istasked to their investigations and prosecutionsdivision. Following Revenue restructuring in2003, all investigation activity was consolidated inthis division with a remit to co-ordinate all Rev-enue prosecution work and in particular toincrease the number of criminal investigations forserious tax offences and ultimately to increase the

these are proceeding to court. Bench warrantshave been issued in three cases and three casesare before the courts.

It should be noted that Revenue also takesprosecutions in the District Courts each year inrespect of in excess of 1000 cases related to non-filing of tax returns.

New powers to assist Revenue to pursue taxevasion are included in this year’s Finance Bill,which completed Committee Stage in the Dailyesterday evening. In this, my first Finance Bill, Ihave sought to strike a balance between combat-ing tax evasion and avoidance and ensuring thatthe tax system recognises the needs and concernsof compliant taxpayers.

74. Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Financethe number of court prosecutions initiated as aresult of tax evasion in respect of each year since1997; the number of cases in which convictionswere secured; the number of cases in whichprison sentences were imposed; the sentence ineach case; if he is satisfied with the level of courtcases taken having regard to the high level of eva-sion; if he will report on the work of the investi-gations and prosecutions division of the RevenueCommissioners; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7157/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I amadvised by the Revenue Commissioners that thetable provided gives information in relation tocourt prosecutions initiated for tax evasion.

number of prosecutions. The number of investi-gators was also increased for this purpose.

Recent figures indicate that this approach isnow proving successful. There are currently 45cases under investigation for potential pros-ecution, the DPP is considering a further eightcases and has given directions to prosecute inanother four. Bench warrants have been issued inthree cases for failure to attend court and three


[Mr. Cowen.]cases are in the court process. If this is combinedwith the four cases for which convictions havebeen obtained in 2005, it is the highest combinedfigure to date and vindicates the decision to con-centrate Revenue’s prosecution resources in onearea.

National Pensions Reserve Fund.

75. Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the amount in the funds of the national pen-sions reserve fund at the latest date for which fig-ures are available; the amount invested outside ofIreland; the amount held in cash balances; and ifhe will make a statement on the matter.[7196/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The 2003annual report of the National Pensions ReserveFund Commission shows that at 31 December2003 the marked to market value of the fund was\9,561 million. This included cash deposits of\1,283 million, net current assets of \36 million,unrealised gains on foreign derivative contracts of\70 million and equities and bonds worth \8,172million. Of this \8,172 million, \8,099 million wasinvested in non-Irish equities and bonds.

The Commission also publishes quarterly per-formance statements setting out a summary of thefund’s performance in the year to date as a meansof improving the timeliness of information on thefund. The most recent of these performance state-ments, for the quarter to end December 2004, waspublished on 9 February 2005. It shows that theestimated market value of the fund was \11,689million at 31 December 2004. Of this amount,\1,299 million was held in cash and other net cur-rent assets, including derivatives, \12 million washeld in property, a total of \8,893 million washeld in equities and \1,485 in bonds. The state-ment does not distinguish between Irish and non-Irish investments.

The Commission’s annual report is required toinclude information on the investment strategyfollowed by the fund, a report on the investmentreturn achieved and a valuation of the net assetsof the fund at year-end. These requirements aredesigned to ensure that detailed information con-cerning the fund is made available to the Ministerand the public at the appropriate time.

As the Deputy will be aware, the National Pen-sions Reserve Fund Commission which managesthe fund is independent of Government. It con-trols and manages the fund with discretionaryauthority to determine and implement the fund’sinvestment strategy. This investment strategy isbased on a commercial investment mandate withthe objective of securing the optimal return overthe long term, having regard to (a) the purpose ofthe fund as set out in section 18(1) of the NationalPensions Reserve Fund Act 2000 and (b) the pay-ment requirements of the fund as provided forunder section 20 of the Act, provided the level ofrisk to the moneys held or invested is acceptableto the Commission.


76. Mr. Broughan asked the Minister for Fin-ance if his Department has carried out anyfurther review in relation to public private part-nerships; if his attention has been drawn to thespecific reports from the United Kingdom inrelation to the cost of such public private partner-ships for certain public transport infrastructureand other public service infrastructure and thefindings of these reports that these projects areexcessively costly when compared with designand build methods or traditional methods ofpublic financing; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7149/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): TheGovernment is committed to developing the PPPprocess as a viable procurement option for appro-priate projects within the overall context of publicinvestment in infrastructure and public services.PPPs are one procurement tool to be used along-side traditional approaches.

In common with all large capital projects, thevalue for money achieved in individual projects isdetermined by a number of factors including thequality of the procurement process. The value formoney achieved in individual projects is a matterin the first instance for the accounting officer inthe Department or office sponsoring a project.

My Department prepares and issues guidelinesfor Departments and agencies in regard to theassessment, approval, audit and procurement ofPPP projects, taking into account the experienceof projects to date and any further relevant infor-mation, including any from other countries, asappropriate. Lessons gained from the initial pilotphase have been incorporated into our processes,structures and procedures, including the estab-lishment of the National Development FinanceAgency, NDFA. We are still learning and willcontinue to keep our processes and proceduresunder review. As regards the position in othercountries, including the UK, it is my understand-ing that their experience would indicate that PPPscan be cost-effective in the right circumstances.

State Property.

77. Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Fin-ance the number of foreign guests who stayed atFarmleigh House during 2004; if he has plans forgreater access by community or voluntary groupsto Farmleigh’s facilities in view of its low level ofusage as a Government guest house; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7204/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): A total of 73 foreign guests stayedin Farmleigh in 2004, involving a total of 146 bednights. Two high level foreign delegations stayedovernight in the main house involving a total of45 people and 104 bed nights. The Secretary Gen-eral of the United Nations, Mr. Kofi Annan, andhis delegation was one of these. In addition 28foreign guests stayed overnight in the courtyardresidence, involving 42 bed nights. These stays


related to the programme of cultural events man-aged by the Office of Public Works that had aparticularly international focus in 2004.

Farmleigh experienced a very busy year in 2004as the property was used by the Irish Governmentas one of the main venues for EU Presidencymeetings and receptions. As a result of its exten-sive use during the EU Presidency it was not feas-ible to use the property for residential use duringthe first six months of the year.

The Office of Public Works operates a verycomprehensive public access programme atFarmleigh. Approximately 110,000 people visitedFarmleigh and enjoyed its facilities in 2004,through a combination of open access days, spec-ific public events and booked tours. Very manycommunity and voluntary groups make use ofFarmleigh’s facilities and amenities in this way,particularly through the booked tours. The Officeof Public Works will continue to work atdeveloping and improving its public access prog-ramme for the benefit of these groups and for thepublic generally.


78. Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Fin-ance the latest information available from thecentral applications facility in respect of appli-cations from civil servants and other public ser-vants currently located in Dublin who wish totransfer to new locations outside of Dublin underthe Government’s decentralisation programme;the way in which this compares with the Govern-ment target of 10,300; his views on the potentialloss of skills and expertise for specialist Stateagencies should they be decentralised with so fewpersons willing to transfer; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7190/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The latestfigures from the central applications facility showthere is very substantial interest in the prog-ramme. New applications for decentralisationcontinue to be received. Since the period forpriority applications finished in September 2004,over 500 new applications have been received.

During the period for priority applications upto 7 September 2004, a total of 8,958 staff, madeup of 8,152 civil servants and 806 public servants,applied for transfer to new locations. Of thisnumber, 4,813 staff, made up of 4,236 civil ser-vants and 577 public servants, are based inDublin.

There are particular issues that arise in dealingwith the State agencies. The correct approach isto tease out the issues and develop good long-term solutions in consultation with all of the par-ties involved. This is the approach being adoptedby the decentralisation implementation group.

The results are encouraging and provide a verygood base from which to move forward.

Nursing Home Subventions.

79. Ms McManus asked the Tanaiste and Mini-

ster for Health and Children the funding which isavailable in view of the refusal of the Health Ser-vice Executive to exceed the maximum level ofenhanced subvention and its statement that thefunding available to it in 2005 will determine thescope for a review of the maximum enhancedsubvention rate this year in its letter of 14February 2005; if it will enable the review to becarried out; and if she will make a statement onthe matter. [7305/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. S. Power): As the Deputy isaware, responsibility for the administration of theNursing Home (Subvention) Regulations, 1993rests with the Health Service Executive. Thereare currently three rates of subvention payableunder the regulations, \114.30, \152.40 and\190.50 for the three levels of dependency whichare medium, high and maximum.

Under Article 10.6 of the Nursing Homes(Subvention) Regulations, 1993 the Executivemay pay more than the maximum rate of subven-tion in a case, for instance, where personal fundsare exhausted. The application of these pro-visions in an individual case is a matter for theexecutive in the context of meeting increasingdemands for subvention subject to the provisionsof the Health Act, 2004. The average rate of sub-vention paid by the executive generally exceedsthe current approved maximum rate of subven-tion. For 2005, funding of over \120 million hasbeen made available for the operation of thescheme, and increase of \5.7 million over the2004 allocation.

The nursing home subvention scheme is beingreviewed by my Department and I do not intendto increase rates of subvention pending the out-come of the review.

Health Service Allowances.

80. Dr. Upton asked the Tanaiste and Ministerfor Health and Children if she will report on anapplication for the domiciliary care allowance fora person (details supplied) in Dublin 10.[7306/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. T. O’Malley): The Health Act2004 provided for the Health Service Executive,HSE, which was established on 1 January 2005.Under the Act, the HSE has the responsibility tomanage and deliver, or arrange to be deliveredon its behalf, health and personal social services.This includes responsibility for payment of andentitlement to domiciliary care allowance.Accordingly, my Department has requested thechief officer for the HSE’s eastern regional areato investigate the matter raised and to replydirectly to the Deputy.

Crisis Pregnancy Information Services.

81. Ms McManus asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children her views on thebogus pregnancy counselling agencies that are in


[Ms McManus.]operation in a number of locations around thecountry and which provide inaccurate and some-times inflammatory information regarding abor-tion; her further views on the opinion of a person(details supplied), that nothing can be done tostop these agencies from operating; if she willconsider developing legislation to require suchagencies to apply for a licence to operate; and ifshe will make a statement on the matter.[7307/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): Recent research commissioned andpublished by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency refersto the unworthy practices of so called rogue agen-cies. The reported behaviour of these agenciestowards vulnerable women experiencing crisispregnancies is objectionable and unprofessional;it shows that they are not focused on helpingwomen. Indeed the research found that their tac-tics extended to lies, threats and misrepresen-tation, behaviour that should be brought to theattention of the Garda authorities.

While there are no plans to consider a regu-lated licensing system such as that proposed bythe Deputy, a greater awareness amongst thepublic of the professional counselling servicesavailable from reputable crisis pregnancy agen-cies is an important step to counteracting thework of rogue agencies. The Positive Optionscampaign, developed by the Crisis PregnancyAgency, CPA, in 2002, is one such major infor-mation programme that has been promoting sup-port services in crisis pregnancy. The focus of thecampaign is to make women more aware of theiroptions, should they have a crisis pregnancy, andto improve the supports and assistance availableto women in this situation.

Initiatives undertaken as part of the campaignhave included a text message information service,wallet card, posters, website and television adver-tisements. Last year the CPA achieved thenational dissemination of 250,000 leaflets, 250,000cards and 10,000 posters to key points such as GPsurgeries, family planning clinics, pharmacies,libraries, schools and citizens information centres.The Positive Options website received 1,000 hitsper month in 2004, which is a measure of theresponse to this information campaign. MyDepartment is monitoring the impact of thisextensive information campaign.

Furthermore, the CPA is sponsoring consumertips in the Dublin Golden Pages to promote theuse of trustworthy counselling services. It has alsoplaced advertisements with the national andregional Golden Pages directories. The CPA hasalso written to all crisis pregnancy counsellingagencies requesting them to monitor complaintsagainst rogue agencies.

82. Ms McManus asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children if her attention hasbeen drawn to the fact that all of the nine agen-cies funded by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency nowprovide information on all three options facing

women with a crisis pregnancy; if she has satisfiedherself that even those agencies which are pub-licly anti-abortion are in a position to provideaccurate and impartial information on abortion asan option; if she is satisfied further that standardsexist across all of these publicly funded agenciesto ensure that the information they provide inrelation to all of the options is accurate and usefulto women in crisis pregnancy; and if she will makea statement on the matter. [7308/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The Crisis Pregnancy Agency,CPA, has informed me that the nine agencies par-ticipating in the Positive Options campaign pro-vide counselling on abortion; but some do notprovide information likely to be necessary inorder for a woman to avail of pregnancy termin-ation services. The CPA is compiling a manual ofgood practice for crisis pregnancy counsellors inconjunction with crisis pregnancy counsellingagencies. The CPA has informed me thatreferrals by agencies which do not provide infor-mation on pregnancy termination services, tocrisis pregnancy agencies that do, will beaddressed in this manual.

The CPA launched its strategy to address crisispregnancy in late 2003. The CPA acknowledgesin this document that crisis pregnancy counsellinghas the potential to provide women withstandardised information on supports available tothem. The Agency aims to review the type ofinformation available to women in crisis preg-nancy counselling through this strategy, in orderto set and maintain high standards. It has com-missioned a number of research studies into theprovision of crisis pregnancy counselling. Theneed to develop a training module for crisis preg-nancy counsellors to provide counselling up to anagreed quality standard has also been identified.This module is being provided and it will be usedby all state funded organisations that offer crisispregnancy counselling. Its objectives are toensure that women seeking counselling receive aminimum standard of care including the provisionof accurate information.

I welcome the initiatives taken by the CPA tofurther enhance and standardize crisis pregnancycounselling services provided by agencies.

Hospital Staff.

83. Ms McManus asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children if a replacementnurse will be appointed to the communitymothers scheme in Newbridge, County Kildare tobring up the staffing to its original full com-plement; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7309/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The Health Act 2004 provided forthe Health Service Executive, which was estab-lished on 1 January 2005. Under the Act, theexecutive has the responsibility to manage anddeliver, or arrange to be delivered on its behalf,


health and personal social services. This includesresponsibility for the appointment of nursing staffto the community mothers scheme in Newbridge,County Kildare. Accordingly, my Departmenthas requested the chief officer for the executive’ssouth western area to investigate the matterraised and to reply directly to the Deputy.

Health Services.

84. Dr. Twomey asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children the total fundinggiven to the HSE in 2005 for development fund-ing; the projects which will be funded by theseresources; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7336/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The Revised Estimates Volume2005 shows a gross current figure of \10.975billion for the HSE’s Vote 40. This is an increaseof \1.209 billion or 12.4% over the 2004 notionalout turn. The 2005 figure includes funding fortechnical adjustments necessary due to the estab-lishment of the new HSE Vote, as explained inthe Revised Estimates Volume 2005.

Within the overall increase for the HSE, anadditional \200 million is provided for three spec-ific priority areas in the coming year. This fundingis made up of a package of \70 million to allowfor a “whole system” approach to improving acci-dent and emergency services; an additional \60million for the extension of the medical cardscheme to a further 230,000 people, including \30million for an additional 30,000 full medical cardsand \30 million for the introduction of approxi-mately 200,000 new doctor visit cards in 2005; and\70 million for disability services, comprising \40million for the intellectual disability sector and\15 million each for physical and sensory dis-ability and mental health services.

85. Dr. Twomey asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children the timescale andamount of development funding for key prioritiesannounced during the publication of the Esti-mates and Budget 2005 package for accident andemergency and disability services; when patientscan expect to avail of these services; and if shewill make a statement on the matter. [7337/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): On publication of the Estimates for2005, I announced a ten point action plan toimprove the delivery of accident and emergencyservices. Additional revenue funding of \70 mill-ion and additional capital funding of \10 millionis available to the Health Service Executive thisyear for these initiatives. I have met with seniormanagement of the HSE and my Department isworking closely with the HSE to ensure the earlyimplementation of these measures.

Reported progress to date confirms that HSEplans to put the necessary measures in place arewell advanced. Some improvements, for examplethe discharge of patients to nursing home care,

are expected to materialise shortly while otherswill require further time to be fully implemented.My Department will continue to monitor pro-gress in this regard.

In November 2004 I also announced additionalrevenue funding of \70 million as part of a specialrevenue development fund for services for peoplewith disabilities. Additional capital funding of \60million has also been provided to support thesedevelopments. The allocation of the \70 millionfunding is as follows — \40 millionto services forpersons with intellectual disability and those withautism; \15 millionto services for persons withphysical or sensory disabilities; and \15mto men-tal health services.

I expect that the detail of how the disabilityfunding is used will be fully clarified in the con-text of my approval of the HSE service plan for2005. The service plan is currently under con-sideration by my Department and I expect to bein a position to respond to the HSE within the 21day period specified for this purpose. It will thenbe a matter for the HSE to put the relevant ser-vices in place.

86. Dr. Twomey asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children if she will publishall existing uncommenced developments in eachHSE area; if funding will be available in 2005; andif she will make a statement on the matter.[7338/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): It is not always possible for anagency to commence approved developments onschedule. Developments can get delayed for anumber of reasons, such as the recruitment ofappropriate personnel, or the acquisition ofappropriate premises. When this occurs, it is nor-mal practice for the funding to be carried forwardinto the following year. Accordingly, unspentdevelopment funds will form part of the servicedelivery, and thus form part of the followingyear’s service plan.

In this context, I have referred this question tothe Health Service Executive, requesting thatthey respond to the Deputy directly, outlining theextent to which unspent development funds formpart of the 2005 service plan. I have requestedthat the HSE address this query as a matter ofurgency.

87. Mr. Gregory asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children the reason corefunding has been refused to a project (detailssupplied); if this will be reviewed; and if she willmake a statement on the matter. [7343/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. S. Power): The Health Act2004 provided for the Health Service Executive,which was established on 1 January 2005. Underthe Act, the executive has the responsibility tomanage and deliver, or arrange to be deliveredon its behalf, health and personal social services.This includes responsibility for the funding of


[Mr. S. Power.]projects relating to drug treatment services.Accordingly, the Department has requested theHSE to investigate the matter raised and to replydirectly to the Deputy.

Cancer Screening Programme.

88. Mr. Ring asked the Tanaiste and Ministerfor Health and Children when the cancer screen-ing programme, BreastCheck, will be operationalin the western region of the Health ServiceExecutive; and the date the programme will com-mence. [7350/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The roll out of the national breastscreening programme to the remaining countiesis a major priority in the development of cancerservices. This will ensure that all women in therelevant age group in every county have access tobreast screening and follow up treatment whereappropriate.

A capital investment of approximately \21million has been approved to construct and equiptwo static clinical units, one in Cork and the otherin Galway. Design briefs in respect of the capitalprojects have been completed. It is anticipatedthat the advertisement for the appointment of adesign team will be placed in the EU journal inthe coming weeks. Additional capital funding of\3 million has been approved for the relocationand development of the symptomatic breast dis-ease unit, in tandem with the BreastCheckdevelopment at University College Hospital,Galway. I am confident that the target date of2007 for the expansion of BreastCheck nationallywill be met.

Any woman, irrespective of her age or resi-dence, who has immediate concerns or symptomsshould consult her GP who, where appropriate,will refer her to the symptomatic services in herarea.

Health Services.

89. Mr. McHugh asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children when the fundingwill be made available in order to employ therequired number of staff to enable the two palli-ative support beds provided at Arus Mhuire inTuam, County Galway to be open; the reason forthe six month delay in providing funding; and ifshe will make a statement on the matter.[7366/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. S. Power): The Health Act2004 provided for the Health Service Executive,which was established on 1 January 2005. Underthe Act, the executive has the responsibility tomanage and deliver, or arrange to be deliveredon its behalf, health and personal social services.This includes responsibility for the provision ofpalliative care. Accordingly, my Department hasrequested the chief officer for the executive’s

western area to investigate the matter raised andto reply direct to the Deputy.

Parents for Justice.

90. Mr. O’Shea asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children if she will meet witha group (details supplied); and if she will make astatement on the matter. [7367/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): I have arranged to meet with rep-resentatives of the Parents for Justice group at2 p.m. on Thursday, 24 March 2005 in LeinsterHouse.

Health Services.

91. Mr. Murphy asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children when she will pro-vide the needed finance to the southern healthboard to enable it to award the home care grantto a person (details supplied) in County Cork;and if the award will be backdated to the date ofapproval. [7368/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. S. Power): The Health Act2004 provided for the Health Service Executive,which was established on 1 January 2005. Underthe Act, the executive has the responsibility tomanage and deliver, or arrange to be deliveredon its behalf, health and personal social services.This includes responsibility for the provision ofthe home care grant scheme in the Cork area.Accordingly, my Department has requested thechief officer for the executive’s southern area toinvestigate the matter raised and to reply directlyto the Deputy.

Aids and Appliances.

92. Mr. Murphy asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children the cost of an ultrasound machine, an EEG machine and equipmentthat carries out a CAT scan. [7369/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The cost of medical equipment,including that referred to by the Deputy, dependsprimarily on specification requirements and theresponse to tender procedures in specificinstances.

The Health Service Executive has responsi-bility for the procurement of medical equipmentin the public health sector. I have requested theexecutive to provide the Deputy with an indica-tion of costs incurred in recent procurements ofthe items specified.

Hospital Services.

93. Mr. O’Shea asked the Tanaiste and Mini-ster for Health and Children her proposals tofacilitate the provision of an EEG unit at Water-ford Regional Hospital; and if she will make astatement on the matter. [7370/05]


Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The Health Act 2004 provided forthe Health Service Executive, which was estab-lished on 1 January 2005. Under the Act, theexecutive has the responsibility to manage anddeliver or arrange to be delivered on its behalf,health and personal social services. This includesresponsibility for the provision of services atWaterford Regional Hospital. Accordingly, myDepartment has requested the chief officer forthe executive’s south eastern area to investigatethe matter raised and to reply directly to theDeputy.

94. Mr. Stagg asked the Tanaiste and Ministerfor Health and Children if the full complement ofbeds is now in use in the Maynooth communitycare unit, Maynooth, County Kildare; if not, thenumber of beds in use; the reason for the delayin bringing the unit to full capacity; and if she willmake a statement on the matter. [7376/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Healthand Children (Mr. S. Power): The Health Act2004 provided for the Health Service Executive,which was established on 1 January 2005. Underthe Act, the executive has the responsibility tomanage and deliver, or arrange to be deliveredon its behalf, health and personal social services.This includes responsibility for the provision ofhealth services in the Maynooth community careunit. Accordingly, my Department has requestedthe chief officer for the executive’s easternregional area to investigate the matter raised andto reply directly to the Deputy.

95. Mr. Stagg asked the Tanaiste and Ministerfor Health and Children if her attention has beendrawn to the serious overcrowding in recentweeks in the accident and emergency unit at NaasGeneral Hospital, Naas, County Kildare; the wayin which she intends to improve matters at thehospital prior to autumn 2005; and if she willmake a statement on the matter. [7379/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The Health Act 2004 provides forthe Health Service Executive, which was estab-lished on 1 January 2005. Under the Act, theexecutive has the responsibility to manage anddeliver, or arrange to be delivered on its behalf,health and personal social services. This includesresponsibility for services at Naas GeneralHospital. Accordingly, my Department hasrequested the chief officer for the executive’seastern regional area to investigate the matterraised and to reply directly to the Deputy.

I have identified the delivery of accident andemergency services as a priority area for atten-tion. I have announced a ten point action plan inrelation to accident and emergency serviceswhich is being financed with \70 million currentfunding and \10 million capital funding. MyDepartment is liaising with the HSE to progressthe implementation of the plan.

Departmental Correspondence.

96. Mr. Quinn asked the Tanaiste and Ministerfor Health and Children if her Department hasreceived letters dated 21 October 2004 and 21January 2005 from a person (details supplied) inDublin 4; when a reply will be issued; and if shewill make a statement on the matter. [7400/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): My Department has been in con-tact with the Health Service Executive in theeastern regional area and requested that contactbe made with the individual concerned as apriority in relation to the issue raised.

Consultancy Contracts.

97. Ms Burton asked the Tanaiste and Ministerfor Health and Children the amount paid in feesor remuneration to a person (details supplied) forconsultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of her Department for each year since1998; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7449/05]

Tanaiste and Minister for Health and Children(Ms Harney): The information requested is beingcollated by my Department and will be forwardedto the Deputy as soon as possible.

Schools Refurbishment.

98. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Financewhen the asbestos remediation works to a school(details supplied) in County Kildare will be car-ried out; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7364/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): Planning is in hand for a scheme toreplace the asbestos based roofs at the school inquestion. Works will commence as soon as poss-ible following completion of this process and thenecessary tendering and contractual proceduresand subject to agreement on programming withthe school authorities.

Garda Stations.

99. Mr Stagg asked the Minister for Finance ifhe has approved the revised sketch scheme forthe new Garda station for Leixlip, CountyKildare; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7383/05]

104. Mr Stagg asked the Minister for Finance ifnegotiations with Kildare county council for theacquisition of a small portion of land to the frontof the site for the new Garda station for Leixlip,County Kildare have been concluded; if a revisedsketch scheme has been submitted to the Depart-ment of Justice, Equality and Law Reform forapproval; if approval has issued from the Depart-ment of Justice, Equality and Law Reform; whenconstruction is likely to commence; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7382/05]

108. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance when it is expected that final approval will


[Mr. Durkan.]be given to the commencement of site works forthe long awaited Leixlip Garda station; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7419/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): I propose to take Questions Nos.99, 104 and 108 together.

Negotiations are continuing with KildareCounty Council for the acquisition of anadditional plot of land for this development. TheOffice of Public Works wrote to the council againon 16 February 2005 regarding clarification ofcertain estate issues in respect of this plot of land.No response has been received from the councilas yet. When these negotiations are completedsatisfactorily, a reviewed sketch scheme will beissued to the Department of Justice, Equality andLaw Reform for approval.

Tax Code.

100. Caoimhghın O Caolain asked the Ministerfor Finance if he will report on his review of taxreliefs; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7462/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Iannounced in my Budget Statement that myDepartment and the Revenue Commissionerswill undertake a detailed review of certain taxincentive schemes and tax exemptions in 2005.This review will evaluate their impact and oper-ation including their economic and social benefitsfor the different locations and sectors involvedand the wider community. In addition, the reviewwill examine the degree to which these schemesallow high-income individuals to reduce theirtax liabilities.

The review of tax reliefs includes a specialpublic consultation process seeking submissionson measures that could be introduced to balancethe benefit of such reliefs with the extent to whichthese are used by high-earners to reduce their taxbill. The public consultation was advertised on 8January 2005 and submissions should be made tomy Department before 31 March 2005. I wouldwelcome the views of public representatives,either individually or via the forum of the rel-evant Oireachtas Committees and of the socialpartners in due course in relation to all thesematters.

I announced in a press release on 6 January2005 that my Department had advertised forexternal consultants to review certain tax incen-tive schemes. Tenders were invited from suitablyqualified consultants to undertake two separatestudies in economic, fiscal and social terms, asnecessary, of the impact, operation, effectivenessand cost of 15 separate tax incentive schemes.The request for tenders was placed in the OfficialJournal of the European Union on 24 December2004.

Seven tenders have been received in myDepartment and a decision on the awarding ofthe contracts will be taken by the end of March

2005. It is envisaged that the consultancy reviewof these various reliefs will be completed by theend of July 2005.

Finally, the review will also involve the examin-ation by my Department and the Revenue Com-missioners of certain other tax exemptions, forexample, for stallions, woodlands, artists and pat-ent income. The aim is to have all of these exam-inations completed by autumn 2005 so that thevarious issues can be examined in the context ofthe 2006 budget, in December 2005.


101. Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Financeif he will provide a copy of the criteria being usedby the Office of Public Works in seeking appro-priate sites or buildings for use by the State sectorin the decentralisation process; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [3933/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): The decentralisation implemen-tation group in its report of 31 March 2004 statethat “the overall objective of the acquisitionstrategy is to secure, to the greatest extent poss-ible, the right building at the right location, at theright time and at the right price and to do so inan open and transparent manner. . .”.

Underpinning this objective is a set of prin-ciples, which were adopted by the group andwhich are entitled Principles to Underpin Accom-modation Acquisition Strategy. These principlescan be accessed on the Decentralisation website:www.decentralisation.gov.ie/property/principles.

Consumer Debt.

102. Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister forFinance his views on whether there is cause forconcern at the latest figures on consumer debt,which show a higher ratio of debt to income thanever before; and if he will make a statement onthe matter. [6217/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): I am awareof the concerns expressed by a number of com-mentators in relation to the continued stronggrowth in credit, particularly to the householdsector and the possible effects of increasingindebtedness upon borrowers. The growth of cre-dit and the associated increase in indebtedness isa matter for the Central Bank and Financial Ser-vices Authority of Ireland, taking into account itsrole as a part of the European system of centralbanks and the functions of the financial regulatorin relation to the prudential supervision of finan-cial institutions and the protection of the con-sumers of those firms.

I am advised by the financial regulator that theincrease in personal indebtedness can be viewedagainst a background of record housebuildingand while personal liabilities have increased theseare backed by real assets; non-housing debt is arelatively small proportion of overall personaldebt; and credit card debt in Ireland is growingmore slowly than overall personal debt and is


modest compared with developments in othermarkets where there are concerns aboutunsecured lending.

The provision of consumer credit in Ireland isregulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1995,which is administered by the financial regulator.This Act obliges credit providers to include spec-ific information in all credit agreements inrelation to such matters as the total cost of credit,the amount of each repayment instalment, thenumber of instalments, etc. Additionally, in thecase of housing loans, the Act specifically obligesmortgage providers to inform borrowers of theeffect on the amount of their repayment instal-ments of a 1% increase in interest rates in thefirst year of their mortgages. The purpose ofobliging credit providers to provide such infor-mation is to ensure that consumers, when makingcredit decisions, are armed with the fullest poss-ible information in relation to any credit agree-ment they are entering into and most importantthe impact that servicing a loan will have on theconsumer’s household budget.

In addition, the Central Bank and the financialregulator have sought to raise the level of aware-ness of both borrowers and lenders of the import-ance of prudent borrowing and responsible lend-ing. The financial regulator, with its statutoryconsumer mandate, has developed a number ofspecific initiatives to help consumers makeinformed choices and make the most appropriatecredit decisions given their circumstances. Separ-ately, mortgage lenders were requested to reviewtheir practices in relation to customer incomeverification and the funding of mortgage balancesso as to ensure that not only were loans properlysecured but also that borrowers would be able tofully repay them. They were also advised of theneed to stress test every would-be borrower’sability to meet their credit obligations, in theevent of more challenging times.

Responsible use of credit clearly can haveadvantages for borrowers in terms of their life-styles, etc. On the other hand, it is very importantthat loans fully suit borrowers’ requirements bothin terms of amount borrowed and ability to repay.This is equally important for lenders as inappro-priate lending or borrowing can also be damagingto the economy. I, therefore, fully support theCentral Bank and the financial regulator in theirendeavours to raise the level of awareness of therisks of reckless borrowing and excessive creditgrowth.

Flood Relief.

103. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Financeif he has received a report from Kildare CountyCouncil in relation to flood alleviation measuresin Leixlip, County Kildare; if funding is availablefrom his Department to carry out the work; andif he will make a statement on the matter.[7374/05]

106. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the position regarding the availability of

funding to Kildare County Council to alleviatethe ongoing flooding at Mill Lane, Leixlip,County Kildare and other locations throughoutthe county; and if he will make a statement onthe matter. [7417/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): I propose to take QuestionsNos. 103 and 106 together.

The Office of Public Works has received a copyof the executive summary of a study com-missioned by Kildare County Council on pro-posed flood relief works at Leixlip, CountyKildare. The OPW has written to the countycouncil requesting additional information includ-ing a copy of the full study in order that consider-ation can be given to the council’s application forfunding for the proposed works. A reply is stillawaited.

The Deputies will also be aware that the OPWhas carried out a flood relief scheme on the Shin-keen Stream in Hazelhatch in County Kildarewhich was completed in 2002. In addition, workswere funded and carried out by the OPW onbehalf of Kildare County Council on the Lyreenand Meadowbrook rivers in Maynooth togetherwith the Morrell river in the Kill-Johnstown area.

The Commissioners of Public Works have noplans for the implementation of further floodrelief works in County Kildare at this time.


Security Enhancement.

105. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the extent, nature and cost of any securityenhancement or other features paid for by theState in respect of the homes, offices or otherproperties owned by each Minister and Ministerof State in the past seven years, including securitywalls, electronic devices or other such features;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7404/05]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance(Mr. Parlon): I consider it would be inappropriateto put details of the security measures at eachproperty into the public domain. However, I caninform the Deputy that the total cost of the var-ious elements of security works — physical, elec-tronic, communications etc. for the period inquestion was \350,465.09


National Debt.

107. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the extent to which the national debt hasbeen reduced during the past seven years; and ifhe will make a statement on the matter.[7418/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): Between 31December 1997 and 31 December 2004, the


[Mr. Cowen.]national debt fell from \38,966 million to \37,846million, a reduction of \1,120 million in cashterms. I would suggest that the generally-accepted measure of the debt burden on an econ-omy is the percentage of gross national product,GNP, to which the debt equates. Between 1997and 2004, the debt-to-GNP ratio has fallen from66.1% to 31.1%, a 35 percentage pointsreduction.


Departmental Expenditure.

109. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the extent to which public spending is ontarget under the various headings in the year todate; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7420/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The Budget2005 spending projections for each Departmentwere updated in the 2005 Revised Estimates forPublic Services which were published last week.The REV provided that estimated net votedspending on departmental services will be \36.2billion. The end-February Exchequer returnsshowed that net spending by Departments andoffices is \0.2 billion below profile — of whichabout 80% is current and 20% is capital. Thereare no indications at this stage of the year of anydeviations from 2005 spending targets except forthe costs arising out of the reimbursement ofcharges for long stay care in health board insti-tutions. As made clear in the recent Revised Esti-mates Volume, a Supplementary Estimate will bebrought forward for the costs arising in 2005 onfoot of the recent Supreme Court decision.


110. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance if the development of public private partner-ships in the future presents a liability to the State;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7421/05]

111. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the extent to which he intends to utilise theconcept of public and private partnership in thefuture; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7422/05]


The multi-annual capital investment frame-work set out in Annex D of Budget 2005 sets outtargets for the period 2005-2009 for capital invest-ment funded by PPP-National Development Fin-ance Agency, NDFA. The total 2005-2009 PPP-NDFA targets, which would be remunerated bylong-term unitary payments from Departments’Votes, is \3.675 billion; in addition, there is a tar-get of \1.195 billion for PPPs remunerated byuser charges. There has been good progress on

PPPs overall since the first group of pilot projectswere announced in 1999. Reasonable deal flowhas been established in the roads and envir-onment areas; progress in relation to projectsremunerated by unitary payments from theExchequer has been slower than anticipated. Weare still learning and continue to keep our pro-cesses and procedures under review.

PPPs are acknowledged to be complex, involv-ing, as they do, a long-term financial commitmentfor both the private and public sector partners fora period of anything up to 30 years. I believe thatthe PPP procurement option has an importantrole to play when applied to appropriate projectswhere there is the right scale, risk and operationalprofile to harness the benefits of this newapproach.



113. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance the extent to which the decentralisationprogramme has been advanced in the year todate; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7424/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The tworeports of the Decentralisation ImplementationGroup, DIG, dated 31 March 2004 and 30 July2004 provide detailed accounts of the progressmade in implementing the decentralisation prog-ramme announced last December. An analysis ofthe applications registered with the central appli-cations facility by 7 September 2004 has alsobeen published.

Each organisation produced a first iteration oftheir implementation plans by end May 2004. Theimplementation group rated the plans overall asgood. Updated versions of the plans are beingsubmitted at various dates in early 2005. Overall,I am very pleased with the progress which hasalready been made in driving forward the imple-mentation of the programme.

In addition the DIG report published on 24November 2004 contains proposals on thoseorganisations-locations which, in the group’sview, should be included in the first phase ofmoves and the DIG will report to me again inthe spring of 2005 about progress in relation toimplementation of the programme. The groupwill also deal in that report with the locations andorganisations not covered in the November 2004report.

Banking Sector Security.

114. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance if recent developments have presentedpotential security risks in international banking;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7426/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The recentdevelopments which are currently the subject of


a Garda investigation and widespread publicity,must be viewed in perspective. There is no evi-dence to date that these activities are of a scaleor volume that would pose potential security risksin international banking. Similarly, there is noevidence of any significant involvement, whetherdeliberate or inadvertent, of the national or inter-national banking systems in these activities.

These developments highlight the need for allinstitutions and supervisory authorities to remainalert to unwelcome activity of any kind whichcould pose a risk to the security or reputation ofindividual institutions or the banking system.

115. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance if he is satisfied that adequate legislation isavailable to ensure that the banking system issecure; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7427/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The CentralBank and Financial Services Authority of IrelandAct 2003 established the Irish Financial ServicesRegulatory Authority. The post of consumerdirector is specifically provided for within thestructure of the financial regulator establishedunder that Act. The director exercises importantconsumer protection powers under legislation.

The Central Bank and Financial Services Auth-ority of Ireland Act 2004, complemented the 2003Act, further enhanced the financial regulator’spowers and strengthened the regulatory envir-onment. This Act conferred new powers on thefinancial regulator to impose stiff administrativepenalties, to be applied where there is a breachof: any financial services legislation; codes of con-duct issued by the regulator; or any condition,requirement or direction imposed under legis-lation or codes.

The Act provided for an enhanced structure fordealing with consumers who have complaintsabout financial institutions and also provides con-sumer and industry consultative panels for thefinancial regulator. The consumer panel will havean important role in ensuring that the regulatoris correctly reflecting the interests of consumersin its protective — issue of codes of conduct —and educational — information pamphlets etc. —roles. The Act also established a single statutoryFinancial Services Ombudsman for all financialservices firms. The ombudsman’s office is due tobegin operations on the 1 April 2005. The Finan-cial Ombudsman will have power to order redressin appropriate circumstances.

The Consumer Credit Act 1995, which com-menced in May 1996, regulates the provision ofconsumer credit. It prescribes, inter alia, the formand content of credit agreements for consumerlending, including in the case of loans secured onthe family home a requirement to warn the bor-rower about the risk of losing their home. TheAct also provides for the regulation of fees andcharges imposed by credit institutions.

In addition to the specific regulatory require-ments under the Central Bank and Consumer

Credit legislation, credit institutions are also sub-ject to specific requirements to know theircustomers, keep records and report suspicions ofmoney laundering under criminal justice legis-lation. Their professional advisers, such asaccountants and solicitors, are also subject tothese reporting requirements. All companies aresubject to the enhanced company law regime thathas been put in place in recent years, includingthe oversight role of the Director of CorporateEnforcement.

I am satisfied that the provisions now availablein law provide not just for the effective regulationof the way that credit institutions conduct theirbusiness but also for effective supervision andenforcement of the law where necessary. I amopen to making suitable amendments to the law,if the need arises. In this regard I have asked thefinancial regulator to advise me as soon as poss-ible if anything emerges from recent devel-opments in relation to asset based lending that intheir view would require a legislative change. Theforthcoming Bill to consolidate and moderniseour financial services legislation could offer asuitable vehicle for such amendments.

Disabled Drivers.

116. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Fin-ance when he expects to make a decision inregard to the disabled drivers passengers 1994 taxconcessions regulations with a view to enablingmore persons to qualify; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7428/05]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Cowen): The dis-abled drivers and disabled passengers tax con-cessions scheme is open to people with disabilitieswho meet the specified medical criteria. An inter-departmental review group was established toreview the disabled drivers’ and disabled passen-gers’ tax concessions scheme. The group exam-ined all aspects of the scheme including the quali-fying medical criteria. The report was publishedon my Department’s website in July 2004 andcopies have been placed in the OireachtasLibrary. As agreed by Government in June 2004,I will consider the report on an ongoing basis inthe overall budgetary context having regard tothe existing and prospective cost of the scheme.

Mobile Telephony.

117. Mr. O’Dowd asked the Minister forCommunications, Marine and Natural Resourcesthe steps he intends to take to reduce cross-Border mobile phone roaming charges; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7431/05]

118. Mr. O’Dowd asked the Minister forCommunications, Marine and Natural Resourcesthe action he intends to take to have an all-Ireland mobile phone prefix. [7432/05]

Minister for Communications, Marine andNatural Resources (Mr. N. Dempsey): I proposeto take Questions Nos. 117 and 118 together.


[Mr. N. Dempsey.]Responsibility for the regulation of mobile

phone prices and the overall management of themobile numbering resource in this jurisdiction isa matter for the Commission for CommunicationsRegulation (ComReg) in accordance with therequirements of the Communications RegulationAct 2002 and regulations made under the EURegulatory Framework for Electronic Communi-cations. I have no function in the matter.

In relation to cross-Border mobile phoneroaming charges within the island, the provisionof commercial offerings to tackle this issue, suchas expanding the availability of all-island tariffsto more customers, is primarily a matter for theoperators. I am on record as supporting the workthat ComReg and Ofcom, the UK telecom-munications regulator, have done to date toencourage operators north and south to tacklethis issue.

Telecommunications Services.

119. Ms Burton asked the Minister forCommunications, Marine and Natural Resourceswhen broadband will be supplied to the Wood-vale Estate, Clonsilla, Dublin 15. [7448/05]

Minister for Communications, Marine andNatural Resources (Mr. N. Dempsey): I refer the

Payment (\) Date Services Provided

8,148.98 July 2000 Facilitation in respect of digital terrestrial television project.

3,060.00 December 2001 Post office forum.

1,292.78 January 2002 Post office forum.

5,227.00 May 2002 Post office forum.

Economic Partnership Agreements.

121. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs if theGovernment will actively urge the EU to workwith the 77 African, Caribbean and Pacific coun-tries at the WTO to achieve an extension of theCotonou waiver or to change GATT ArticleXXIV in order that Europe can continue to givepreferential access to developing countries; andhis views on whether this approach is preferableto pushing ahead with reciprocal economic part-nership agreements in view of the fact that theEU 25 and the ACP 77 together constitute thevast majority of WTO members. [7320/05]

122. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs theassessment undertaken by the Government onthe impact of the economic partnership agree-ments on industrial and agricultural producers inIreland’s priority aid countries, including andspecifically the required liberalisation of 90% oftrade with the poorest countries; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7321/05]

123. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs the

Deputy to my reply to Question No. 215answered on Tuesday 1 March 2005.

Consultancy Contracts.120. Ms Burton asked the Minister for

Communications, Marine and Natural Resourcesthe amount paid in fees or remuneration to a per-son (details supplied) for consultancy or otherwork carried out for or on behalf of his Depart-ment for each year since 1998; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7450/05]

Minister for Communications, Marine andNatural Resources (Mr. N. Dempsey): There areno records of payments to the person whosedetails have been supplied since the establish-ment of the Department of Communications,Marine and Natural Resources in June 2002. Thefollowing table sets out details of such payments,if any, by the former Department of the Marineand Natural Resources, Department of PublicEnterprise and Department of Arts, Culture andthe Gaeltacht in the period 1 January 1998 to 17June 2002, in so far as the communications,energy including Geological Survey of Ireland,seafood, research, natural resources, broadcastingand other functions transferred to the Depart-ment of Communications, Marine and NaturalResources with effect from 18 June 2002 areconcerned.

number and dates of communications, meetingsand other representations between his Depart-ment and the Department of Enterprise, Tradeand Employment in relation to EU requests forthe opening of markets under the proposed econ-omic partnership agreements; and if he will pub-lish or otherwise lay the documents relating tothese meetings before Dail Eireann. [7322/05]

124. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs theconcerns his Department has raised with theDepartment of Enterprise, Trade and Employ-ment in relation to the opening up of prioritycountry markets to EU competition; and theareas of their markets which his Department hasrecommended be excluded from liberalisation.[7323/05]

125. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs thenature of the representation of his Departmentat the EU 133 committee meetings consideringliberalisation of trade with priority countriesunder economic partnership agreements.[7324/05]


126. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs theconsultations his Department has had withpriority country governments, business interestsand civil society regarding their defensiveinterests in the economic partnership agreementtrade negotiations; the areas of concern high-lighted through those consultations; and the stepstaken by his Department to ensure those interestsare catered for in the EU position on EPAs.[7325/05]

127. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs theconcerns of his Department regarding theregional groupings being established under theeconomic partnership agreements, specifically hisDepartment’s views on whether Zambia, an Irishpriority aid country, is forced by this process todecide between the two regional groups, SADCand COMESA, in which it has invested years ofenergy; and his further views on whether it isappropriate for Europe through EPAs to effec-tively redraw the economic map of Africa.[7326/05]

128. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs hisviews on whether there are parallels between the1884 redivision of Africa and the contemporaryredrawing of the economic map of Africa throughthe economic partnership agreements. [7327/05]

129. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister ofState at the Department of Foreign Affairs hisDepartment’s assessment of the industries in eachof Ireland’s priority aid countries that will comeunder most pressure as a result of the liberalis-ation envisaged in the economic partnershipagreements; the industries thus identified and thenumber of persons employed in each such indus-try in each priority country; the estimated capa-city these industries have to adjust to competitionfrom European exports during the transitionperiod; and the expected change in the level ofunemployment in each of the priority aid coun-tries as a result of such liberalisation under theEPAs. [7328/05]

Minister of State at the Department of ForeignAffairs (Mr. C. Lenihan): I propose to take Ques-tions Nos. 121 to 129, inclusive, together.

The legally binding Cotonou Agreementbetween the African, Caribbean and Pacific,ACP, states and the European Union providesfor the negotiation of economic partnershipagreements, EPAs, between the parties. As tradeis a European Community competence, it is theEuropean Commission which negotiates theEPAs between the EU and six regional groupingsof ACP states on behalf of the member states.The Commission provides member states withregular updates on the progress of the nego-tiations. The EPAs are to enter into force by 1January 2008.

The EPAs are first and foremost instrumentsfor development that will foster the smooth and

gradual integration of ACP states into the worldeconomy, with due regard for their own politicalchoices and their own development priorities,thereby promoting their sustainable developmentand contributing to poverty eradication in theACP countries. They combine trade and widerdevelopment issues in a unified framework whiletaking account of the specific economic, socialand environmental circumstances of eachregional group and its component states. Byenlarging ACP markets through regional inte-gration and by making regulatory frameworks inthese countries more transparent, EPAs cancreate an environment conducive to the privatesector and thus function as a vehicle for long-termeconomic development.

According to Article 37/7 of the CotonouAgreement the negotiations on the EPAs:

. . . shall take account of the level of develop-ment and the socio-economic impact of trademeasures on ACP countries, and their capacityto adapt and adjust their economies to the lib-eralisation process. Negotiations will thereforebe as flexible as possible in establishing theduration of a sufficient transitional period, thefinal product coverage, taking into account sen-sitive sectors, and the degree of asymmetry interms of timetable for tariff dismantlement,while remaining in conformity with WTO rulesthen prevailing.

While Ireland like the other member states doesnot participate in the ongoing EPA negotiations,we are satisfied that the Commission is dis-charging its mandate in accordance with theseprovisions of the Cotonou Agreement. It is clearfrom the most recent EU-ACP joint report of lastOctober on the state of play of regional EPAnegotiations that the process with the six regionsis conducted with considerable concern for itsimpact on the economies of the ACP countries.As with all trade negotiations, the EPA nego-tiation has brought to light differences ofapproach between the parties in a number ofareas. It is to be hoped that as the talks progress,these divergences can be resolved in accordancewith the principles and objectives underlying thenegotiations. However, I do not think that it ishelpful for the success of the EPA project at thisstage to suggest taking action at the WTO for acontinuation beyond 2008 of the preferentialaccess of ACP countries to EU markets.

In Ireland, the Department of Enterprise,Trade and Employment has primary responsi-bility for trade policy. An officer of that Depart-ment represents Ireland at meetings of the 133committee. The committee normally meets oncea month at the level of full members. An officerof the Department of Foreign Affairs also attendsmeetings of the committee on a regular basis.

Given the importance for Ireland of trade andtrade relations with other countries, includingthose which are programme countries forIreland’s development cooperation programme,there is very regular and ongoing contact with the


[Mr. C. Lenihan.]Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employ-ment and other Departments including theDepartment of Agriculture and Food in prepar-ing for meetings of the 133 committee and onquestions relating to trade generally, includingthe EPA negotiations.

All of the programme countries in Ireland’sbilateral aid programme — Ethiopia, Lesotho,Mozambique, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia andTimor Leste — are ACP states. Our underlyingapproach in those countries is complementary tothat of the EPAs in that we are sensitive to theneed to help build the economic infrastructure inthese least developed countries, LDCs, so thatthey will be able to avail of an improving inter-national trading environment. To that endIreland works both with its partner governmentsand with other donor countries to ensure thatthere is a real focus on economic development,employment generation and on helping to equipour African partners to pursue access for theirgoods and progressively the means to avail of thataccess. On the aid side Ireland is achieving theUN target of 0.15% of GNP to LDCs.

Part of our overall engagement with the privatesector in sub-Saharan Africa involves working tocreate a better climate for enterprise develop-ment and economic growth and involves effortsaimed at creating a more enabling internationalenvironment and improving coherence on tradeand agriculture domestically. Finally, the level ofdetail being sought by the Deputy in relation toemployment in particular industries in sub-Saharan Africa and other related details is notavailable to me.


130. Ms Burton asked the Minister for ForeignAffairs the amount paid in fees or remunerationto a person (details supplied) for consultancy orother work carried out for or on behalf of hisDepartment for each year since 1998; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7451/05]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. D. Ahern):The Department has no record of any paymentmade to the person referred to by the Deputy forconsultancy or other work for the period inquestion.

Sports Capital Programme.

131. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Arts,Sport and Tourism the portion of the \25,000allocated to an organisation (details supplied) inCounty Mayo under the sports capital prog-ramme in 2002 which has been allocated; and thereason the remainder of the grant has not beenawarded. [7315/05]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Mr.O’Donoghue): A grant of \25,000 was provision-ally allocated to the club in question under the2002 national lottery funded sports capital prog-ramme operated by my Department. The grant

was subject to the terms and conditions of theprogramme. As I informed the Deputy in myreply to Parliamentary Question No. 226 of 1March 2005, all of the documentation requiredshould have been submitted to my Departmentand the grant drawn down by 27 June 2003 andthe club was advised of these conditions by wayof letters from my Department dated 9 May 2002and 25 June 2003. As the relevant documentationwas still not received from the club the pro-visional grant offer was withdrawn in December2004.

Swimming Pool Projects.

132. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Arts,Sport and Tourism the position in relation to theapplication by Kildare county council for grantaid towards the cost of replacing the swimmingpool at Naas, County Kildare; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7377/05]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Mr.O’Donoghue): The proposal to replace Naasswimming pool is one of a number of swimmingpool projects within the local authority swimmingpool programme under consideration in myDepartment. There are four stages in the prog-ramme: preliminary report; contract document;tender approval; and construction. The Naas pro-ject is at contract document stage. The questionof this project moving on to the next stage in theprogramme is being considered in my Depart-ment in the context of funding available in theDepartment’s multiannual capital envelope forthe local authority swimming pool programmeand the limit on borrowings by local authorities

Sports Capital Programme.

133. Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Arts,Sport and Tourism if funding will be granted forthe capital costs of a community sports andrecreation complex in Ballisodare County Sligo;when a decision will be made; if funding will beallocated; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7446/05]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Mr.O’Donoghue): The national lottery funded sportscapital programme, which is administered by myDepartment, allocates funding to sporting andcommunity organisations at local, regional andnational level throughout the country. The prog-ramme is advertised on an annual basis.

Applications for funding under the 2005 prog-ramme were invited through advertisements inthe press on 5 and 6 December 2004. The closingdate for receipt of applications was 4 February2005. All applications including one from the clubin question are currently being evaluated againstthe programme’s assessment criteria which areoutlined in the guidelines, terms and conditionsof the programme. I intend to announce the grantallocations for the programme as soon as possibleafter the assessment process has been completed.



134. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Arts,Sport and Tourism the amount paid in fees orremuneration to a person (details supplied) forconsultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of his Department for each year since1998; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7452/05]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Mr.O’Donoghue): My Department has no record ofany fees or remuneration being paid to the personreferred to by the Deputy in respect of any con-sultancy or other work carried out on behalf ofthe Department since its establishment in June2002.

Departmental Staff.

135. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister of Stateat the Department of Enterprise, Trade andEmployment the total number of posts for labourinspectors in his Department; the number of suchposts that are vacant; his plans to add to thenumber; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7298/05]

136. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister of Stateat the Department of Enterprise, Trade andEmployment the number of labour inspectorswho were out on loan during the EU Presidency;if all of these inspectors have returned to theinspectorate; if any labour inspector has beentransferred out of the inspectorate to other div-isions of his Department in the past two years; ifsuch transferees have returned; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7299/05]

Minister of State at the Department ofEnterprise, Trade and Employment (Mr.Killeen): I propose to take Questions Nos. 135and 136 together.

There are 21 labour inspector posts and atpresent there are 17.5 officers serving in theinspectorate. In addition one inspector is cur-rently on long term sick leave and one job sharinginspector is on extended unpaid leave. A furthertwo Inspectors are currently engaged in workwith the employment appeals tribunal to assistwith processing a backlog of cases.

One inspector was on loan to the Departmentof Foreign Affairs during the Irish Presidency ofthe EU and returned to the inspectorate in July2004. In addition ten inspectors were involved inPresidency related work at various stages duringthe first half of 2004.

As agreed in the mid-term review of SustainingProgress, four additional labour inspectors wereappointed earlier this year. This increased thecomplement of inspectors to 21. The review ofthe mandate and resourcing of the labour inspec-torate contains a wide ranging analysis of variousoptions regarding the enforcement of employ-ment rights, including the powers of the inspec-torate and the number of inspectors required in

the future. The report is currently being con-sidered by the social partners.

Labour Inspectorate.

137. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister forEnterprise, Trade and Employment the numberof successful prosecutions brought by the labourinspectorate in each of the years 2003 and 2004;the largest number of such prosecutions whichrelated to a single employer; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7300/05]

Minister of State at the Department ofEnterprise, Trade and Employment (Mr.Killeen): The number of successful prosecutionsinitiated by the labour inspectorate in 2003 was20. In 2004 the labour inspectorate initiated 14successful prosecutions. The largest number ofprosecutions which related to a single employerwas nine.

The primary function of the labour inspector-ate is to seek compliance and rectification of anybreaches identified, including payment of anyarrears due to employees. Therefore animportant measure of the effectiveness of thelabour inspectorate is to look at the arrears ofpay collected on behalf of employees. For theperiods in question the recoveries were as fol-lows: 2003 — \226,000; 2004 — \486,000.

Inspectors pursue allegations of worker mis-treatment and when evidence of non-compliancewith the relevant employment rights legislation isfound, the inspectorate seeks redress for the indi-vidual or individuals concerned and, if appro-priate, a prosecution is initiated. Successful pros-ecution can be dependent on adequate supportfrom witnesses.


138. Ms Burton asked the Minister forEnterprise, Trade and Employment the amountpaid in fees or remuneration to a person (detailssupplied) for consultancy or other work carriedout for or on behalf of his Department for eachyear since 1998; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7453/05]

Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ-ment (Mr. Martin): My Department’s recordsshow the following payments to the personreferred to by the Deputy. Fees amounting to\18,111.54 were paid to the person in the 1997-98tax year and \2,632.21 in the 1998-99 tax year,in respect of service as a rights commissioner. Apayment in the amount of \35,336.81 was madeon 22 December 1999 in respect of work carriedout in the course of an enquiry into an industrialdispute.

Free Travel Scheme.

139. Mr. Coveney asked the Minister for Socialand Family Affairs if free travel (details supplied)is available to European Union nationals; if hewill consider amending the legislation to provide


[Mr. Coveney.]that European Union citizens visiting this coun-try, while not living permanently here, be able toavail of the same entitlements. [7349/05]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr.Brennan): The free travel scheme is available toall people living in the State aged 66 years, orover. It is also available to carers and to peoplewith disabilities who are in receipt of certainsocial welfare payments.

European nationals aged 66 or over who arepermanently living in Ireland, qualify for freetravel in the same way as Irish citizens aged 66or over.

The issue of extending the free travel schemeto non-resident pensioners was examined in thereview of the free schemes which was publishedby the policy institute, Trinity College, Dublin in2000. The review considered that the main objec-tive of the free travel scheme is to encourageolder people and people with disabilities toremain independent and active within the com-munity, thereby reducing the need for insti-tutional care.

It noted that extending the scheme to Irish pen-sioners living abroad who visit Ireland wouldhave significant administrative and cost impli-cations even if it was confined to those in receiptof Irish social welfare pensions. In 2000, it wasestimated that the extension of the free travelscheme to EU pensioners could incur expendi-ture of the order of \10 million to \19 million,depending on the level of concession granted.

It appears that, if the scheme were extendedalong the lines suggested, it would have to beextended to all pensioners who are EU nationalscoming to Ireland for temporary stays.

I am mindful that this matter has been raisedin the House a number of times recently and I amcontinuing my examination of the issues involved.

Social Welfare Appeals.

140. Mr. Eoin Ryan asked the Minister forSocial and Family Affairs the reason a person(details supplied) in Dublin 4 is not allowed toapply for unemployment assistance; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7429/05]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr.Brennan): Social welfare legislation provides thata person must satisfy the conditions of beingavailable for and genuinely seeking work in orderto be entitled to unemployment benefit or unem-ployment assistance.

The person concerned had made an applicationfor asylum in the State and on 28 January 2005the Department of Justice, Equality and LawReform refused this application. He was givenleave to reside in Ireland on humanitariangrounds on the basis that he is not free to acceptoffers of employment.

The person concerned had applied for unem-ployment benefit on 26 January 2005 and hisclaim was disallowed by a deciding officer on the

grounds that he is not available for work due tohis status. He is being informed of this and of hisright of appeal.

In the meantime, it is open to him to contacthis local community welfare officer with a viewto applying for supplementary welfare allowance.

Social Welfare Benefits.

141. Mr. P. Breen asked the Minister for Socialand Family Affairs the reason a person (detailssupplied) in County Clare who was in receipt ofthe disability allowance, can no longer qualify forsame; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7304/05]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr.Brennan): In the case raised by the Deputy, theperson commenced a FAS training course on 6December 2004. Under agreed arrangementswith FAS, people undertaking training who arein receipt of disability allowance, are eligible fora FAS training allowance instead of disabilityallowance. Payment of disability allowance is sus-pended for the duration of the person’s attend-ance on the FAS training course as the person’sincome support needs are being met through thetraining allowance.

FAS pays participants a standard trainingallowance or an amount equal to their currentdisability allowance payment, including livingalone allowance, free fuel allowance, etc., which-ever is greater. In the case raised by the Deputy,the FAS training allowance is being paid at theequivalent of the maximum rate of disabilityallowance of \148.80 per week with a trainingbonus of \31.80 per week.

Participants also retain any secondary benefitsto which they have entitlement, for example,medical cards, free schemes etc.

All disability allowance recipients who transferto a FAS training scheme under these arrange-ments are guaranteed that they will not lose outby transferring to the training allowance; thatthey will retain any secondary benefits they arein receipt of and that in the event that they areunable to continue with the training programme,their disability allowance payment will berestored automatically.

My Department aims, through a provision of arange of supports, to encourage and assist peoplewith disabilities and long-term illnesses who arein receipt of social welfare payments to identifyand take up available employment, training andother self-development opportunities, whereappropriate.

The Deputy raises the issue of treatment ofpersons on disability benefit or invalidity pensionin similar circumstances. Income maintenancepayments available under the social welfare codeconsist of a range of social insurance benefitswhich are financed through PRSI contributions,and a range of social assistance payments, whichare payable subject to a means test and financedby the Exchequer through general tax revenue.The purpose of the means test is to ensure that,


for people who do not have social insurance coveror who have insufficient PRSI contributions toqualify for benefit, resources are targeted at thosemost in need.

A person who is ill or disabled, and has suf-ficient PRSI contributions, may qualify for eitherdisability benefit or invalidity pension. Entitle-ment to social insurance benefits such as theseare not affected by the claimant’s income or, ifone of a couple, by their spouse or partner’sincome, subject to certain limits.

A person in receipt of disability benefit orinvalidity pension may apply to the Departmentfor an exemption from the general “no work”conditions which apply to these contributoryschemes in order to undertake a training courseto fit him or her for another job if he or she isunable to do his or her usual work.

In such cases where permission is given to com-mence a course, any training allowance payablecan be made to the person in addition to the pay-ment of disability benefit or invalidity pension,without affecting the rate of entitlement due tothe contributory nature of these schemes.

Where people have not worked or do not havesufficient PRSI contributions, they may apply fordisability allowance, which is means tested. Inassessing means, account is taken of the claim-ant’s own means and, in the case of a couple, thejoint means of the couple are assessed. Inaddition, the value of any capital held is assessed.In this way, applicants for disability allowance aretreated in the same manner as applicants forother social assistance payments.


142. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Socialand Family Affairs the amount paid in fees orremuneration to a person (details supplied) forconsultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of his Department for each year since1998; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7454/05]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr.Brennan): In 2003, the personnel section of myDepartment engaged the services of the personconcerned, to adjudicate on a pay claim submit-ted by the branch managers’ association. Thiswork included a one-day arbitration hearing on19 February 2003 and the total cost was \1,306.

No other consultancy or other work was car-ried out for or on behalf of this Department since1998 by the person concerned.

Social Welfare Benefits.

143. Mr. Gregory asked the Minister for Socialand Family Affairs the reason the clothing allow-ance for elderly persons in need has been with-drawn and restricted to persons with asthma, dia-betes and arthritis; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7471/05]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mr.Brennan): The supplementary welfare allowance

scheme, which is administered on my behalf bythe community welfare division of the HealthService Executive, HSE, provides for exceptionalneeds payments to be made to assist with essen-tial, once-off expenditure in exceptional circum-stances. Exceptional needs payments, are made atthe discretion of the community welfare divisionof the Health Service Executive and I do not haveany function in deciding individual cases.

There is no automatic entitlement to an excep-tional needs payment. Every decision is based onconsideration of the circumstances of the case,taking account of the nature and extent of theneed and of the resources of the householdconcerned.

There is no standard clothing allowance foradults. It is expected that expenses incurred inrespect of normal clothing requirements, whichare of a predictable and recurring nature, shouldbe budgeted for out of regular weekly incomewhether from earnings or from social welfarepayments.

Rail Network.

144. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Transportif he will approve the business case for theKildare Arrow route project; if not, when he willrespond to Irish Rail; if funding is available toproceed with the project from 2005; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7373/05]

145. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Transportif he has considered Irish Rail’s plan to provide aDART service on the Maynooth suburban line;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7375/05]

Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen): I proposeto take Questions Nos. 144 and 145 together.

Iarnrod Eireann has submitted a business caseto my Department for the development of agreater Dublin integrated rail network, aimed atmeeting the projected demand for rail services inthe area into the future. Included in the businesscase are proposals to: construct a new rail stationin the city centre; provide an interconnector tun-nel linking Heuston to the Docklands; provide aspur off the Maynooth line to the N3 beyondDunboyne; double the track on a section of theKildare line.

The proposal includes plans to electrify theMaynooth line. This would allow DART typetrains to operate on that line. The IarnrodEireann proposed integrated rail network plan isbeing assessed by my Department and I expect torespond to the company in the context of the ten-year transport investment framework that isbeing finalised at present.


146. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Trans-port the amount paid in fees or remuneration to aperson (details supplied) for consultancy or otherwork carried out for or on behalf of his Depart-


[Ms Burton.]ment for each year since 1998; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7455/05]

Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen): Ourrecords do not show any direct fees or remuner-ation paid to the person concerned for con-sultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of the Department of Transport during theperiod in question.

Irish Language.

147. Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Com-munity, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views onthe fact that no grant for 2005 has been approvedby Foras na Gaeilge for any Irish language organ-isation in the south-east region; the action he pro-poses to take; and if he will make a statement onthe matter. [7433/05]

Minister for Community, Rural and GaeltachtAffairs (Eamon O Cuıv): As I have indicated pre-viously, the Deputy will understand that decisionsregarding the provision of grants by Foras naGaeilge is a matter for Foras na Gaeilge itself,in the context of its statutory obligations and itsbusiness and corporate plans.

I understand from Foras na Gaeilge that it wasclearly explained last year that the previous com-munity schemes funded by Foras would come toan end on 31 December 2004. At the same time,it was announced that Foras would hold an opencompetition for community Irish languageschemes for 2005-2007 in the autumn of 2004 andthat the successful projects would be funded overa period of three years.

I understand from Foras that 44 groups appliedunder the new scheme and that a standardisedand comprehensive assessment was carried outon all the applications in the context of thecriteria that had been laid out in the applicationform. I understand that 20 of the 44 applicationswere successful. Only one application wasreceived from the Waterford region and thatapplication was not successful.


148. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Com-munity, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the amountpaid in fees or remuneration to a person (detailssupplied) for consultancy or other work carriedout for or on behalf of his Department for eachyear since 1998; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7456/05]

Minister for Community, Rural and GaeltachtAffairs (Eamon O Cuıv): No fees or remuner-ation have been paid to the person concerned forconsultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of my Department since its establishmentin June 2002.

Grant Payments.

149. Mr. Connaughton asked the Minister forAgriculture and Food when the outstanding 40%

of the suckler cow grant for 2004 will be awardedto a person (details supplied) in County Galway;and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7316/05]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (MaryCoughlan): Under the herd number quoted, anapplication for premium on seven animals underthe 2004 suckler cow premium scheme wasreceived on 11 February 2004, from a personother than the person named.

Payment of the 60% advance instalment hasissued to the applicant. Processing for 40% bal-ancing instalments is ongoing and it is expectedthat payments will start at the end of March.


150. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Agri-culture and Food the amount paid in fees orremuneration to a person (details supplied) forconsultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of her Department for each year since1998; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7457/05]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (MaryCoughlan): No such payments have been madeby my Department to the person in question from1998 to date.

Grant Payments.

151. Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Agri-culture and Food her plans for the modulationfund under the single farm payment; if sheintends to use it as a top up to the disadvantagedarea payments and to address animal welfareissues; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7464/05]

Minister for Agriculture and Food (MaryCoughlan): The modulated funds become avail-able for use in 2006. I will decide on their use andseek the necessary EU approval in the comingmonths. Currently my Department is finalising itsexamination of the relevant options. As part ofthat examination, there has been widespreadpublic consultation and discussions withstakeholders.

The use of modulated funds in 2006 is limitedto certain measures under the relevant EU regu-lations. The eligible measures are those in theCAP rural development plan, agri-environment,early retirement, less favoured areas paymentsand forestry and the new initiatives introduced aspart of the CAP mid-term review, food quality,animal welfare, farm advisory services and meet-ing standards. The two options referred to in thequestion are among those under consideration.

Crime Prevention.

152. Mr.Durkan asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if he is satisfied thatadequate legislation exists to prevent moneylaundering through the banking system; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7425/05]


Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I refer the Deputy to my answerto his Parliamentary Question No. 248 ofWednesday, 16 February 2005 on the same sub-ject in which I set out the extensive legislation inplace in this jurisdiction to tackle money laun-dering activities, including through the bankingsystem. The situation remains the same.

Citizenship Applications.

153. Mr. Noonan asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if a person married toan Irish citizen (details supplied) will be allowedto remain here; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7310/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I understand that the circum-stances of the person in question have recentlychanged and that his case is subject to a reviewwith regard to granting further periods of per-mission to remain in the State. It is expected thatthis review will be completed shortly.

Child Care Facilities.

154. Ms McManus asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if the ADMfunding for a playgroup (details supplied) will beextended; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7311/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): As the Deputy may be awarethe Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme,EOCP, provides grant assistance towards thestaffing costs of community based, not-for-profitchild care services which have a clear focus ondisadvantage. Funding under the staffing measureof the EOCP is only made available to help sup-port the staffing costs of those projects which candemonstrate that they are providing child care inareas of significant disadvantage and that they aresupporting disadvantaged parents to accessemployment, education or training. It was notintended that the EOCP would meet the full costsof running a service. The programme makes staff-ing grant assistance available for a period ofyears, usually three years, to enable them to movetowards self-sustainability which would normallybe achieved when the service is operating at capa-city and with an appropriate fee structure.

In a number of services, the levels of disadvan-tage among parents are such that families wouldbe unable to pay economic fees and thereforethose services are likely to require ongoing Statesupport towards their staffing costs. My Depart-ment is currently reviewing the arrangements forthe ongoing support of such services in verydisadvantaged areas and plans to introduce newarrangements to support those services in caseswhere they will have received staffing grantassistance for three or more years, at any dateprior to 31 August 2005. Information regardingthe introduction of these new arrangements will

be forwarded to the groups in question as soonas it is available.

The relevant groups have been informed thattheir existing level of staffing grant assistancefunding will be continued up to 31 August 2005,subject to the groups maintaining their forecastlevels of service and meeting the targets they hadpreviously agreed. The amounts awarded aredeemed sufficient to enable the groups to main-tain their approved level of service and to givethem an opportunity to review their services andtheir fee structures.

In the interim, it would be premature of me tocomment further on future staffing grantassistance.

Registration of Title.

155. Mr. Neville asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if the Land RegistryOffice will forward a copy of the deeds of a houseto a person (details supplied) in CountyLimerick. [7312/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I am informed by the Registrarof Titles that there is no record of an applicationpending on this folio at present. If the Deputycan provide me with the date of lodgement of theapplication and a Land Registry referencenumber I will make further inquiries on hisbehalf.

Deportation Orders.

156. Mr. Gregory asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if he willreview the decision to deport persons (detailssupplied) in view of the representations made ontheir behalf. [7313/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): Both persons referred to by theDeputy are young Nigerian nationals who arrivedseparately in the State in April 2001 and Sep-tember 2002, respectively, as unaccompaniedminors and claimed asylum. Both their appli-cations for refugee status were refused followingconsideration by the Office of the Refugee Appli-cations Commissioner and on appeal by theOffice of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Thesedecisions were communicated to them by lettersinforming them of three options open to them:that is, to leave the State voluntarily before theircases were considered for deportation; consent tothe making of a deportation order in respect ofthem; or to make written representations, within15 working days, setting out the reasons theyshould not be deported and instead to be allowedto remain temporarily in the State.

The case of each was considered under section3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, andsection 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 on the prohib-ition of refoulement, including consideration of allrepresentations received on their behalf. Deport-ation orders were subsequently made in respectof each in January 2005 and December 2004,


[Mr. McDowell.]respectively. These orders were recently servedon them requiring them to report to the Gardanational immigration bureau in order for arrange-ments to be made for their return to Nigeria.Both presented to the bureau as requested andare due to present again on 10 March 2005 so thatarrangements could be made with the NigerianEmbassy for their documentation. The bureauinforms me the process of documentation is cur-rently in train and that travel documents areexpected to be issued soon.

While both persons were minors when theyfirst entered the State, one of them reached 18years in March 2003 and is now being treated asan adult. When his travel documents have beenobtained from the Nigerian Embassy, the Gardanational immigration bureau will be arranging hisreturn. This is expected shortly. The other personwill be 18 years in May 2005 and is being treatedas a minor who is in the care of the Health Ser-vice Executive. His return will require specialarrangements to be made with the Nigerian auth-orities for his reception upon arrival in Nigeria.As this is likely to take some time to arrange,there are no immediate plans at this stage torepatriate him to Nigeria.

157. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if he plans anydeportations to conflict zones, including theDRC, Angola or Sierra Leone in the near future;the dates on which they will take place; if therehave been any deportations to these countriessince he became Minister; and if so, the numberin each case. [7332/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): Section 5 of the Refugee Act1996 regarding prohibition of refoulement,requires that a person shall not be expelled fromthe State or returned in any manner whatsoeverto a State where, in the opinion of the Minister,the life or freedom of that person would bethreatened on account of his or her race, religion,nationality, membership of a particular socialgroup or political opinion.

Every deportation case is fully considered withregard to this specific requirement as well as theeleven other factors required under section 3(6)of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended. MyDepartment uses extensive country of origininformation drawn from different independentsources, including UNHCR, in helping to makethis evaluation. The situation is constantly beingmonitored in regard to any changes in the coun-tries concerned, in particular in respect of thenon-refoulement requirement.

Persons served with deportation orders areinformed of the reasons for their deportationsand are requested to report to the Garda nationalimmigration bureau in order for arrangements tobe made for their removal. The place, date andtime of removal is a matter for the bureau. Thesedetails are only communicated to the person con-

cerned, and their legal representatives, in orderto preserve their dignity and anonymity, as wellas for security reasons. I cannot, therefore, com-ment on any removals that may be planned in thenear future to the regions and countries men-tioned by the Deputy.

In regard to previous deportations made tothese countries, I set out the details in the follow-ing table:

Deported Countries June 2002 to date

Democratic Republic of Congo Nil

Angola 4

Sierra Leone 1

Asylum Applications.

158. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform his plans forasylum seekers who have no Irish children buthave been in the asylum system for over threeyears; and his plans for asylum seekers who havechildren who have been in the education systemhere for periods of over three years. [7333/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I am informed by the relevantdetermining authorities — the Office of the Refu-gee Applications Commissioner, ORAC, and theRefugee Appeals Tribunal, RAT, that there arein the region of 100 cases in the asylum systemfor over three years.

In the case of the Office of the Refugee Appli-cations Commissioner a recommendation of sometype has previously issued but for a variety ofreasons further processing is now required. Ingeneral this arises where the case is returned toORAC in order to be readmitted to the first stageprocess either as a consequence of the RAT over-turning an ORAC decision on a “manifestlyunfounded” or Dublin Convention-regulationcase, or where agreement is reached to readmitan applicant in order to resolve a judicial reviewof the original decision on the case.

In regard to appeals outstanding in the RATfor more than three years from the date ofappeal, the majority of cases have been delayeddue to judicial review proceedings in eitherORAC or RAT. It is my intention to have allasylum applications that have been in the systemfor over three years processed as expeditiouslyas possible.

159. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Ministerfor Justice, Equality and Law Reform the numberof female asylum seekers who have been grantedConvention refugee status on the basis that theirdeportation would place them in danger of geni-tal mutilation; and the number of women whohave been given humanitarian leave to remain onthe basis that their deportation would place themin danger of genital mutilation. [7334/05]


Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): Persons seek and are grantedrefugee status in the State based on a wide varietyof reasons, some of them multiple, in accordancewith provisions of the Refugee Act 1996 and the1951 UN Refugee Convention. A detailed break-down of these reasons is not maintained by theOffice of the Refugee Applications Com-missioner or by the Office of the RefugeeAppeals Tribunal. Consequently, statistics are notavailable as to the number of females, if any,granted refugee status based on the alleged riskof female genital mutilation.

Similarly, the Minister must consider 11 factorsunder section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act 1999,as amended, together with section 5 of the Refu-gee Act 1996, prohibition of refoulement, whenconsidering whether or not to deport somebody.Statistics are not maintained in a way that disting-uishes whether a specific factor, either on its ownor as one of a number of factors, resulted in aperson being granted leave to remain in the State.

I should say that the issue of refoulement as setout in section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996, is givenfull consideration in every case when decidingwhether to make a deportation order or granttemporary leave to remain in the State. MyDepartment uses extensive country of origininformation drawn from different independentsources, including UNHCR, in evaluating thesafety of making returns to third countries. Thismeans that a person shall not be expelled fromthe State or returned in any manner whatsoeverto a State where, in my opinion, the life or free-dom of that person would be threatened onaccount of his or her race, religion, nationality,membership of a particular social group or politi-cal opinion.

Foreign Passports.

160. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if his attentionhas been drawn to the practice of the NigerianEmbassy here of asking Nigerian citizens toobtain a Garda report on a lost passport evenwhen they have never lost their passport here; ifhis attention has been drawn to the practice ofthe Nigerian Embassy of charging \435 for pass-ports which are needed for the residency appli-cations and imposing a deadline of 28 Februaryfor persons applying for these passports; if hisattention has been drawn to the fact that manyapplicants cannot afford the \435 fee; if he willbe taking these issues up with the NigerianEmbassy; and the steps he has taken to resolvethis matter. [7335/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): On 15 January 2005, I intro-duced revised arrangements for the making ofapplications by non-nationals for permission toremain on the basis of their parentage of a childborn in Ireland prior to 1 January 2005. All appli-cants are required to provide adequate proof of

their identity by way of a passport or nationalidentity card.

Establishing the true identity of an applicantunder the revised arrangements is a basic obli-gation, both on the State and the applicant. Inthis context, the requirement that an applicantproduces an identity document from his or hercountry of origin cannot be waived. I wish toadvise the Deputy that I have been made awareof reports that certain embassies may be chargingparticular amounts for the issue of passports totheir nationals. However, the amount to becharged by a foreign embassy in this regard is nota matter for my Department, or for the IrishGovernment, to determine.

Death Certificates.

161. Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if proposals exist toregularise the circumstances under which under-takers may deal with bodies in the absence ofdeath certificates; his views on the efficiency thatexists on issuing such certificates; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7341/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The issue of certification ofdeath is not generally the responsibility of myDepartment. However, I can say that in so far asthe Coroner’s Service is concerned, all aspects ofits operation are being considered for updating inthe context of the preparation in my Departmentof proposals for a new Coroner’s Bill, in line withthe commitment in the Government legislationprogramme as announced on 28 January 2005.

Garda Operations.

162. Mr. Gregory asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if gardaı havebeen able to assist residents (details supplied) inDublin 7 with the very serious anti-social behav-iour near to their homes; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7344/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I am informed by the Gardaauthorities that they are aware of the reportsregarding anti-social behaviour in the locationconcerned and I understand that a policing planhas been devised to combat it. I am advised thata Garda inspector has been in direct contact withthe residents referred to, concerning policing ofthe area, and regular contact will be maintainedwith them. I am further informed that a full inves-tigation into the specific incident raised has beencarried out and a file has been forwarded to thelaw officers for directions.


163. Mr. Cuffe asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform the reason for thedelay in processing applications for naturalis-ation, in particular that of a person (details


[Mr. Cuffe.]supplied); and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7347/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): An application for a certificateof naturalisation from the person referred to bythe Deputy was received in the citizenship sectionof my Department on 12 May 2004. The averageprocessing time for such applications is currently24 months. It is likely, therefore, that the appli-cation of the individual concerned will befinalised by May 2006. The lengthy processingtime for applications is primarily due to the sig-nificant increase in the volume of applicationsbeing received during the last number of years.In the year 2000, some 1,004 applications fornaturalisation were received. The comparable fig-ure in 2004 was 4,074.

It is of relevance to point out to the Deputythat while there are approximately 600 civil ser-vice staff currently assigned to immigrationrelated functions in both my Department and itsassociated independent agencies, approximately70% of those staff have been engaged full time inactivities associated with the processing of asylumclaims or in the provision of support for asylumseekers. The reduction in the numbers claimingasylum during 2003 and 2004 has freed upresources which are currently being deployed inthe improvement of mainstream immigration ser-vices. The citizenship section is one of the areaswhich is benefitting from this process.

I will inform both the applicant and the Deputyas soon as I have reached a decision on thisapplication.

Visa Applications.

164. Mr. Murphy asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if a file regarding per-sons (details supplied) will be reopened.[7371/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The applications referred to bythe Deputy were for the purposes of allowing thespouses of non-EEA nationals employed underthe employment permit scheme to reside withthem in the State. These applications wererefused by my Department in May 2004 on thegrounds that, based on the evidence supplied, thepersons resident in the State did not have suf-ficient finances available to them to guarantee thesupport of the applicants without recourse topublic funds.

An appeal was submitted in respect of eachrefusal. However, based on the additional evi-dence supplied, the appeals officer was unable toconclude that the initial decision should be over-turned. As each application is entitled to only oneappeal, it is not possible to review these appli-cations again. However, should the applicants stillwish to travel, a fresh application should be sub-mitted accompanied by any additional supporting

documentation that it is felt will address thereasons for refusal given by my Department.

Garda Stations.

165. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform the reason he does notintend to carry out a review of the number of 24hour Garda stations in the State with a view toopening new 24 hour stations to reflect popu-lation changes, with particular emphasis on thenorth east Kildare towns of Maynooth, Leixlipand Celbridge; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7381/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I am informed by the Gardaauthorities that there are currently no plans toextend the number of Garda stations open to thepublic on a 24 hour basis. The Garda authoritieshave also informed that the extension of the cur-rent opening hours of the Garda stations in thenorth Kildare area would necessitate the employ-ment of Garda personnel on indoor administra-tive duties and that, in their view, such personnelcan be utilised in providing a visible Garda pres-ence on outdoor policing activities. Local Gardamanagement is satisfied that the arrangementscurrently at Maynooth, Leixlip and Celbridge areadequate to meet the present policing needs ofthe area.

With regard to Garda resources generally, I ampleased that the Government has approved myproposal to increase the strength of the GardaSıochana to 14,000 members on a phased basis, inline with the An Agreed Programme for Govern-ment commitment in this regard. This is a keycommitment in the programme and its implemen-tation will significantly strengthen the operationalcapacity of the force.

The Commissioner will now draw up plans onhow best to distribute and manage theseadditional resources. In this context, the needs ofthe Kildare district will be fully considered withinthe context of the needs of Garda districtsthroughout the country. Clearly, the additionalresources will be targeted at the areas of greatestneed, as is envisaged in the programme forGovernment. The programme identifies in part-icular areas with a significant drugs problem anda large number of public order offences but it willbe possible to address other priorities as well,such as the need to significantly increase thenumber of gardaı allocated to traffic duties aspart of the new Garda traffic corps. I havealready promised that the additional gardaı willnot be put on administrative duties. They will beput directly into frontline, operational, high visi-bility policing. They will have a real impact.

Garda Deployment.

166. Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Mini-ster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform thenumber of Garda personnel allocated to eachGarda station in County Meath at 1 January 1997


and 1 January 2005; and the total number ofgardaı in the county on each of these dates.[7387/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I am informed by the Gardaauthorities, who are responsible for the detailedallocation of resources, including personnel, thatthe number of Garda personnel allocated to eachGarda station in County Meath at 31 January1997 and 31 January 2005, and the total numberof gardaı in the county on each of these dates,were as set out in the table.

Station 1997 2005

Laytown 6 8

Ashbourne 22 40

Dunboyne 14 12

Dunshaughlin 11 10

Kells 31 31

Athboy 4 6

Oldcastle 3 4

Nobber 3 3

Trim 24 26

Crossakeel 2 0

Summerhill 2 2

Enfield 18 15

Ballivor 2 3

Navan 47 46

Duleek 4 4

Slane 3 4

Kilmessan 1 0

Total 197 214

Historical statistical information relating toGarda personnel strength is maintained on anend of month basis. Accordingly, the personnelstrength for a particular Garda station is readilyavailable at the end of each month. This is thereason that figures for 31 January 1997 and 2005are provided in response to this question.

With regard to Garda resources generally, I ampleased that the Government has approved myproposal to increase the strength of the GardaSıochana to 14,000 members on a phased basis, inline with the An Agreed Programme for Govern-ment commitment in this regard. This is a keycommitment in the programme and its implemen-tation will significantly strengthen the operationalcapacity of the force.

The Commissioner will now draw up plans onhow best to distribute and manage theseadditional resources. In this context, the needs ofthe Meath district will be fully considered withinthe context of the needs of Garda districtsthroughout the country. Clearly, the additionalresources will be targeted at the areas of greatestneed, as is envisaged in the programme forGovernment. The programme identifies in part-icular areas with a significant drugs problem anda large number of public order offences but it will

be possible to address other priorities as well,such as the need to significantly increase thenumber of gardaı allocated to traffic duties aspart of the new Garda traffic corps. I havealready promised that the additional gardaı willnot be put on administrative duties. They will beput directly into frontline, operational, high visi-bility policing. They will have a real impact.

167. Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Mini-ster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform thenumber of Garda personnel allocated to eachGarda station in County Kildare at 1 January1997 and 1 January 2005; and the total number ofgardaı in the county on each of these dates.[7388/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I am informed by the Gardaauthorities, who are responsible for the detailedallocation of resources, including personnel, thatthe number of Garda personnel allocated to eachGarda station in County Kildare at 31 January1997 and 31 January 2005, and the total numberof gardaı in the county on each of these dates,were as set out in the following table.

Garda Stations 1997 2005

Naas 69 77

Clane 5 6

Kill 3 3

Celbridge 12 19

Maynooth 9 16

Kildare 28 27

Newbridge 26 29

Robertstown 2 3

Kilcullen 3 3

Carbury 2 2

Monasterevin 3 3

Rathangan 2 3

Athy 17 16

Castledermot 2 2

Ballytore 4 1

Ballymore Eustace 1 1

Leixlip 11 27

Kilcock 6 5

Total 205 243

Historical statistical information on Garda per-sonnel strength is maintained on an end of monthbasis. Accordingly, the personnel strength for aparticular Garda station is readily available at theend of each month. This is the reason that figuresfor 31 January 1997 and 2005 are provided inresponse to this question.

With regard to Garda resources generally, I ampleased that the Government has approved myproposal to increase the strength of the GardaSıochana to 14,000 members on a phased basis, inline with the An Agreed Programme for Govern-ment commitment in this regard. This is a key


[Mr. McDowell.]commitment in the programme and its implemen-tation will significantly strengthen the operationalcapacity of the force.

The Commissioner will now draw up plans onhow best to distribute and manage theseadditional resources. In this context, the needs ofthe Kildare district will be fully considered withinthe context of the needs of Garda districtsthroughout the country. Clearly, the additionalresources will be targeted at the areas of greatestneed, as is envisaged in the programme forGovernment. The programme identifies in part-icular areas with a significant drugs problem anda large number of public order offences but it willbe possible to address other priorities as well,such as the need to significantly increase thenumber of gardaı allocated to traffic duties aspart of the new Garda traffic corps. I havealready promised that the additional gardaı willnot be put on administrative duties. They will beput directly into frontline, operational, high visi-bility policing. They will have a real impact.

Departmental Programmes.

168. Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform the funding which willbecome available in the near future for child carefacilities under the Equal Opportunities Child-care Programme 2000-2006. [7389/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The Equal Opportunities Child-care Programme, EOCP, 2000-2006 is a sevenyear development programme which aims toincrease the availability and quality of child careto support parents in employment, education andtraining. The level of demand for capital grantassistance was such that I considered it importantto increase the capital provision for the presentprogramme. Following discussions with my col-league the Minister for Finance, an additionalcapital provision of \90 million was made avail-able over the period 2005-2009, in the context ofthe 2005 budget.

Of this amount, \50 million is being madeavailable under the present programme and theremaining \40 million will flow under the nextphase of the post-2006 EOCP. This augments theincreased EU funding of some \12 million madeavailable last year in recognition of the progressof the programme. This brings the total fundingavailable for the programme to \499.3 millionand now includes an increased provision for capi-tal developments, for which \205 million has beenset aside. In December 2004, I announced an allo-cation of almost \35 million in capital funding tocommunity based not for profit groups.

The availability of the additional capital fund-ing will enable me to make further capital grantassistance available over the coming months andyears to groups which address significant childcare service gaps and where the project proposal

represents good value for money when con-sidered in the context of the current guidelines onbuilding costs. I hope to make further significantcapital commitments during 2005 and thereafter.The ongoing assessment of the applications in thepipeline will be concluded as speedily as possibleto facilitate the development of additional childcare facilities and places at the earliestopportunity.

Prisoner Transfers.

169. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if he will facili-tate the transfer from Limerick to Dublin of aperson (details supplied). [7390/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): Solicitors acting on behalf ofthe person in question made an application for atransfer to Dublin on his behalf on 4 February2005. Having regard to his particular circum-stances with regard to access to translation ser-vices, the reception and integration agency hasarranged accommodation for him in Dublin from1 March 2005.

Prison Accommodation.

170. Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform the arrange-ment which he has made to protect, manage andsecure the buildings of the former prison at Shan-ganagh Castle, Shankill; if the buildings havebeen damaged or have deteriorated in any waysince the closure of the prison; the cost of main-taining and managing the buildings since the clos-ure; his plans for the future of these buildings;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7391/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The Prison Service has in placearrangements to ensure that the property is main-tained in a secure and safe manner. I am not forobvious reasons going to go into detail about thespecific measures but I can confirm that the build-ings have not been damaged or vandalised sincethe closure. A total of \129,798.52 has beenexpended to date on security related measuresand in addition to this, one member of staff hasremained in a caretaker capacity.

A contract has been signed for the sale of 21.5acres of the lands to Dun Laoghaire-RathdownCounty Council and the conveyance is due to becompleted on 30 May next. I intend to dispose ofthe balance of the property including the build-ings later this year. The proceeds of both trans-actions will be utilised towards prison capitalprojects.

Child Care Services.

171. Ms Lynch asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if his attention hasbeen drawn to the fact that there is increasing


uncertainty regarding the continuing funding ofchild care provisions in the Cork city area; if hewill clarify the criteria used by his Department todetermine the term, very disadvantaged, inrespect to funding; when child care organisationswill be issued with funding application forms forthe next round of funding; if all applicationsreceived will be fully processed prior to 31August 2005; if applications are not processed by31 August 2005, there will be a further roll-overof funding; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7430/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): As the Deputy may be awarethe equal opportunities childcare programme,EOCP, provides grant assistance towards thestaffing costs of community based/not-for-profitchild care services which have a clear focus ondisadvantage. Funding under the staffing measureof the EOCP is only made available to help sup-port the staffing costs of those projects which candemonstrate that they are providing child care inareas of significant disadvantage and that they aresupporting disadvantaged parents to accessemployment, education or training. It was notintended that the EOCP will meet the full costs ofrunning a service. The programme makes staffinggrant assistance available for a period of years,usually three years, to enable them to movetowards self-sustainability which would normallybe achieved when the service is operating at capa-city and with an appropriate fee structure.

In a number of services, the levels of disadvan-tage among parents are such that the familieswould be unable to pay economic fees and there-fore those services are likely to require ongoingState support towards their staffing costs. MyDepartment is currently reviewing the arrange-ments for the ongoing support of such services invery disadvantaged areas and plans to introducenew arrangements to support those services incases where they will have received staffing grantassistance for three or more years, at any dateprior to 31 August 2005. Information regardingthe introduction of these new arrangements willbe forwarded to the groups in question as soonas it is available.

The relevant groups throughout the countryhave been informed that their existing level ofstaffing grant assistance funding will be continuedup to 31 August 2005, subject to the groups main-taining their forecast levels of service and meet-ing the targets they had previously agreed. Theamounts awarded are deemed sufficient to enablethe groups to maintain their approved level ofservice and to give them an opportunity to reviewtheir services and their fee structures.

Applications will be processed well in advanceof the 31 August 2005. In the interim, it would bepremature of me to comment further on futurestaffing grant assistance.

Irish Prison Service.

172. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform the rehabili-tation programmes for prisoners provided overthe past ten years; the purpose of each; theprisons in which each programme has beenoffered; the total cost of each per year and to datein 2005; if, in each case, the programme has beendiscontinued; and if so, the reason therefor.[7438/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The Irish Prison Serviceemploys a number of means to encourage pris-oners to bring about positive development withinthemselves, including: programmes in the areas ofeducation, vocational and pre-vocational trainingand lifeskills, specific programmes and individualcounselling to address criminogenic factors, forexample, anger management and sex offendersprogrammes, individual and group counsellingand support, drug treatment, and facilitating theinvolvement of voluntary organisations in provid-ing appropriate prisoner support services. Theseprogrammes are delivered by a wide range ofspecialist services that operate in the prisons, suchas psychologists, teachers, probation and welfareofficers and prison officers.

I note that the Deputy is seeking details of thevarious prison rehabilitation programmes pro-vided over the past ten years. Each prison andplace of detention has in place a range of prisonerrehabilitation programmes catering for its part-icular prison population. Across all of the prisons,the array and content of such prisoner rehabili-tation programmes continue to evolve withadditional elements added or replaced to takeaccount of changing needs. I refer the Deputy tothe annual reports of the Irish Prison Servicewhich give an overview of developments inrelation to the prisons and, in particular, thosereports for most recent years contain prison byprison profiles of prisoner activities. It would betoo substantial a task to assemble in detail all theinformation sought by the Deputy under theheadings he has mentioned and compiling itwould require a disproportionate and inordinateamount of staff time and effort and could not bejustified in current circumstances where there areother significant demands on resources.

As regards the annual costs of such prog-rammes, it is not currently possible to disaggre-gate from the total Irish Prison Service spendingall of the elements that specifically relate torehabilitation programmes for prisoners.However, I advise the Deputy that I obtained abudget for the Irish Prison Service of \369 millionfor 2005, which compares to a budget of \180million provided for prisons in 1997.


Prison Staff.

173. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform the number ofprison staff that will be employed at the newprison complex planned for north County Dublin;and the number and category of other supportstaff who will work at the complex. [7439/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): At this stage no final decisionhas been made as to the exact number or cate-gory of prisoners to be accommodated on the newsite. Therefore, it is not possible to give precisestaff numbers for the new prison complexplanned for north County Dublin at this point intime.

Prison Committals.

174. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Ministerfor Justice, Equality and Law Reform if any pris-oners other than long-term prisoners will be heldin the new prison complex planned for northCounty Dublin; and if so, the other categories ofprisoners that will be held there. [7440/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): At present, Mountjoy Prisonoperates as the largest committal prison for sen-tenced prisoners in the State. In this regard it cat-ers for persons serving sentences ranging from afew days right through the spectrum to includethose sentenced to life imprisonment. It is antici-pated that the new complex will also cater for awide range of offenders. However, no finaldecision has yet been made as to the range ofprisoners to be accommodated at the newcomplex.


175. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Ministerfor Justice, Equality and Law Reform the numberof prison spaces available in the State; thenumber of spaces in use; the number of spacestemporarily closed; the number of spaces perma-nently closed since he assumed his ministerialresponsibilities; and the number of spacesrequired according to his estimates. [7441/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): As of 1 March 2005 themaximum available bed capacity of the prisonsystem was 3,357. There were 3,257 persons incustody on that date. That does not howeverimply the existence of 100 readily availablespaces. Two thirds of the available spaces were inPortlaoise Prison which mainly houses subversiveand other high security prisoners and is not suit-able for the general population. Cloverhill as aremand prison accounted for the balance. Takingthese factors into the account the prison systemcurrently operates at or in excess of full capacity

for sentenced prisoners with some overcrowdingremaining in certain prisons.

The Deputy will be aware that, as an attemptto address the spiralling prisons overtime bill, theGovernment agreed to the mothballing of theplaces of detention at Fort Mitchell and theCurragh during 2004. These institutions each pro-vided space for 102 inmates. However, thetransfer of staff from these institutions allowedfor the opening of new landings at Limerick andMidlands Prison which almost completely offsetthis loss in accommodation space. The future ofboth institutions is under continuous review andany decision on this issue will have regard to theongoing discussions between the Irish Prison Ser-vice and the Prison Officers’ Association.

Shanganagh Castle, which provided capacityfor up to 60 young offenders, ceased to operateas a place of detention in December 2002. Thereasons for this decision have been set out onmany occasions in the past.

It is clear that there is a need for new prisonspaces for a number of reasons including the needto eliminate overcrowding in a number of ourcommittal prisons, in particular, Mountjoy Prison,the Dochas centre and Castlerea Prison. It is alsomy wish to replace outdated prison accommo-dation with new facilities which will eliminate thepractice of “slopping out” and also reduce the“doubling up” which is prevalent throughout thesystem. As part of this process, I can confirm thata total of 150 new spaces are being provided inthe new Portlaoise “C Block” which is due to becompleted in 2007. I can also advise the Deputythat estimates of future space requirements arebeing refined in the context of planning for thedevelopment of the new prison complexes atnorth County Dublin and Spike Island.

Prison Building Programme.

176. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Ministerfor Justice, Equality and Law Reform if the train-ing unit presently located at Glengarriff Paradewill be transferred to the new prison complexplanned for north County Dublin; and the facili-ties that will be provided for prisoners at the newsite. [7442/05]

178. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if St. Patrick’sDetention Centre will be relocated to the newprison complex planned for north County Dublin;if not, his plans for the facility. [7444/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I propose to take QuestionsNos. 176 and 178 together.

A decision has been taken in principle to dis-pose of the current Mountjoy complex includingthe training unit and St. Patrick’s Institution. Afinal decision has not yet been made regarding


the facilities that will be provided for prisoners atthe new site.


177. Aengus O Snodaigh asked the Ministerfor Justice, Equality and Law Reform the numberof prison spaces planned for the new prison com-plex in north County Dublin; the number ofspaces for male prisoners; the number of spacesfor women prisoners; and the number of spacesfor juveniles. [7443/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): At this stage no final decisionhas been made as to the precise number of pris-oners to be accommodated on the new site. Theexisting Mountjoy complex has a total capacity ofover 900 prisoners and the new facility will caterfor more than that number.



179. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform if the case of a person(details supplied) in County Louth will bereviewed. [7447/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): A declaration of acceptance ofIrish citizenship as post-nuptial citizenship wasreceived in the citizenship section of my Depart-ment on 10 October 2003 from the personreferred to in the Deputy’s question. Officials inthe citizenship section wrote to the representa-tives of the person concerned by registered poston 10 January 2005 informing them that it wastheir view that the person concerned did not meetthe statutory criteria for making a declaration ofpost-nuptial citizenship. However, the correspon-dence was returned to my Department marked“not called for”. The company moved to a newaddress and the correspondence has been for-warded to that address. The person concernedhas been afforded an opportunity to make a sub-mission on the reasons for my officials’ view anda final determination on the matter will takeaccount of any submission that is made in thisregard.


180. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Justice,Equality and Law Reform the amount paid infees or remuneration to a person (detailssupplied) for consultancy or other work carriedout for or on behalf of his Department for eachyear since 1998; and if he will make a statementon the matter. [7458/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): My Department has not paid

fees or remuneration to the person whose detailsare supplied.

Visa Applications.

181. Mr. Naughten asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform further toQuestion No. 162 of 24 February 2005, the wayin which the person may enter and leave the Statewhile the application for leave to remain and theapplication for post-nuptial citizenship are bothpending; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7463/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The person in question is freeto leave the State at any time. As a visa requirednational he must be in possession of a valid Irishvisa to allow him travel to the State. It is not thepolicy of my Department to assist persons whodo not have leave to remain in the State with are-entry visa prior to travelling.

Refugee Status.

182. Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform the positionregarding the reunification of a family (detailssupplied); and if the maximum support will begiven to same. [7465/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): The application was recentlyapproved and the refugee was notified in writingof the decision.

Garda Deployment.

183. Mr. S. Ryan asked the Minister forJustice, Equality and Law Reform if, in view ofthe unacceptable increase in anti-social behaviourin Donabate, County Dublin, a Garda station willbe provided and additional Garda resourcesarranged in the interim to be specifically dedi-cated to the Donabate peninsula. [7469/05]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform(Mr. McDowell): I have been informed by theGarda authorities, who are responsible for thedetailed allocation of resources, including person-nel, that Donabate forms part of the Swords sub-district and that personnel attached to SwordsGarda station are charged with the responsibilityfor the provision of a full policing service in theneighbourhood.

The personnel strength of Swords Gardastation, all ranks, as at 1 March 2005, was 68. Thepersonnel strength of Swords Garda station, as at1 March 2004, was 56. This represents an increaseof 12 (or 21%) since that date. There are no plansto establish a Garda station in the Donabate area.A structured and effective policing programme isin force in the subdistrict supported by severalspecialist units — the divisional task force, div-isional traffic unit, district detective unit, district


[Mr. McDowell.]drugs unit and the special detective unit. Com-munity gardaı are assigned to the area and I amadvised they have an excellent rapport with thelocal community.

With regard to Garda resources generally, I ampleased the Government has approved my pro-posal to increase the strength of the Garda to14,000 members on a phased basis, in line withthe An Agreed Programme for Governmentcommitment in this regard. This is a key commit-ment in the programme for Government, and itsimplementation will significantly strengthen theoperational capacity of the force.

The commissioner will draw up plans on howbest to distribute and manage these additionalresources. In this context, the needs of the Swordssubdistrict will be fully considered within the con-text of the needs of Garda districts throughoutthe country. Additional resources will be targetedat the areas of greatest need, as is envisaged inthe programme for Government. The programmeidentifies in particular areas with a significantdrugs problem and a large number of public orderoffences, but it will be possible to address otherpriorities as well such as the need to significantlyincrease the number of gardaı allocated to trafficduties as part of the new Garda traffic corps. Ihave promised is that the additional gardaı willnot be put on administrative duties. They will beput directly into front line, operational, high-visi-bility policing. They will have a real impact.

School Transport.

184. Mr. Ferris asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if it will be possible to providea school bus to take a person (details supplied) inCounty Kerry to school. [7317/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): Under the terms of the primary schooltransport scheme, children are eligible, subject toconditions, for free transport to their nearestnational school or school of amalgamation. Pupilsnot attending their nearest national school may,subject to conditions, avail of concessionary fare-paying transport to another school, subject tospare accommodation being available on the busand provided that no extra State cost is incurredby extending or re-routing the service. In this casethe child referred to by the Deputy is notattending her nearest national school and is avai-ling of concessionary fare-paying transport. Thepresent service is the most that can be offered asadditional costs would be incurred by extendingthe service.

Special Educational Needs.

185. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will consult schoolsbefore making any decision to change to aweighted system of allocating support to children

with special educational needs; and if she willmake a statement on the matter. [7339/05]

186. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will maintain the currentsystem of allocation of resource teaching supportfor children with special educational needs toensure that children who need learning supportreceive it; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7340/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): I propose to take Questions Nos. 185and 186 together.

In the light of the reality that pupils in the high-incidence disability categories of mild andborderline mild general learning disability anddyslexia are distributed throughout the educationsystem, my Department, in consultation with edu-cational interests, developed a general model ofresource teacher allocation to schools to supportstudents in those disability categories. Thatmodel, which was announced by my predecessorin 2004 to come into effect from September 2005,was designed to put in place a permanentresource in primary schools to cater for pupils inthose categories.

The model was constructed so that allocationswould be based on pupil numbers, taking intoaccount the differing needs of the mostdisadvantaged schools and the evidence that boyshave greater difficulties than girls in this regard.The logic behind having a general allocationmodel is to reduce the need for individual appli-cations and supporting psychological assessmentsand put resources in place on a more systematicbasis, thereby giving schools more certainty abouttheir resource levels. This will allow for betterplanning in schools, greater flexibility in identi-fying and intervening earlier with regard topupils’ special needs, as well as making the postsmore attractive to qualified teachers.

As I have told the Dail on a number ofoccasions, I am however very conscious of diffi-culties that could arise regarding the modelannounced last year, particularly for children insmall and rural schools, if it were implemented ascurrently proposed. Accordingly, I am having theproposed model reviewed to ensure that it pro-vides an automatic response for pupils with com-mon mild learning disabilities, without the needfor cumbersome individual applications, while atthe same time ensuring that pupils currently inreceipt of service continue to receive the level ofservice appropriate to their needs. In carrying outthe review, my Department is consulting rep-resentative interests including the NationalCouncil for Special Education.

I have made it clear that I am in favour of usinga general allocation model to ensure that we havein place a permanent resource in our primaryschools to cater for pupils with high-incidencemild disabilities and learning difficulties.


However, it will not be as announced last year.The revised procedure for providing a generalallocation of resource hours to schools will beannounced in the coming weeks, in time to beimplemented for the next school year.

In the lower-incidence disability categoriesresources will continue to be allocated on thebasis of individual applications.

It is important that where there is a particularspecial need in the low-incidence category thosechildren be considered individually. Those pupilsare not evenly distributed among schools, and ageneral allocation model would not be appro-priate. However, the involvement of the NationalCouncil for Special Education and the specialeducation needs organisers will greatly enhancethe speed of response to such applications.


187. Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if an application by a school(details supplied) in County Longford will beexpedited regarding the necessary refur-bishments; and if she will make a statement onthe matter. [7345/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): An application for refurbishment hasbeen received from the school to which theDeputy refers. The application has been assessedin accordance with the published prioritisationcriteria, which were revised following consul-tation with the education partners. Progress onthe project is being considered in the context ofthe school building programme.

In that regard, the Deputy will be aware thaton 10 January this year I announced the firstphase of the 2005 school building programme,which provided details of 122 major school build-ing projects countrywide which will prepare ten-ders and move to construction during 2005. TheDeputy will also be aware that last week Iannounced details of an expansion of the numberof schools that will be invited to deliver theirbuilding projects on the basis of devolvedfunding.

Those announcements form part of a seriesthat I plan to make regarding the schools buildingand modernisation programme that will include:details of schools with projects approved underthe 2005 summer works scheme; schools whoseprojects will further progress through the designprocess; schools that will be authorised to com-mence architectural planning; and details ofschools identified as suitable for constructionunder public private partnerships.

Schools Building Projects.

188. Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Mini-ster for Education and Science the positionregarding the provision of an amalgamated sec-ondary school (details supplied) in County Kerry;

and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7346/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): I am pleased to inform the Deputy thatapproval has recently been given for the designteam to invite tenders, subject to some amend-ments being made to the tender documentation,for the new school project to which she refers.

Construction will commence as soon as poss-ible thereafter subject to a satisfactory outcometo the tender process.

Pupil-Teacher Ratio.

189. Mr. O’Dowd asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science the progress she has made inreducing the pupil teacher ratio in primaryschools as promised in the Programme forGovernment. [7352/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The Deputy should note that signifi-cant improvements have been made in this areain recent years. The pupil teacher ratio, whichincludes all the teachers in the school includingresource teachers, has fallen from 22.2:1 in the1996-97 school year to 17.44:1 in 2003-04. Over4,000 additional teachers have been employed inour primary schools since 1997. These additionalteaching posts have been used to reduce classsizes, tackle educational disadvantage and pro-vide additional resources for children withspecial needs.

In line with the programme for Governmentcommitment, class sizes for the under nine’s willbe reduced still further, with priority given tothose in disadvantaged schools.


190. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science when tenders will be invitedfor the new school for a school (details supplied)in County Kildare; the anticipated timeframe forconstruction; and if she will make a statement onthe matter. [7353/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The project referred to by the Deputyis listed among the large scale projects on thecapital programme for 2005 which have beenapproved to move to tender and constructionover the next 12 to 15 months.

My Department’s building unit arranged a gen-eral information session for all schools on this listto guide them through the process involved. Themeeting took place on 1 February in Tullamoreand representatives from the school in questionattended. My Department’s building unit will bein touch with the school shortly to progress theproject further.

191. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science when tenders will be invited


[Mr. Stagg.]for the required extension to a school (detailssupplied) in County Kildare; the anticipated time-frame for construction; and if she will make astatement on the matter. [7354/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): I am pleased to inform the Deputy thatan extension project at the school to which herefers is on the list of projects approved to pro-ceed to tender and construction in the next 12 to15 months.

Approval has recently been given to the schoolauthority, County Kildare VEC, to prepare thetender documentation for this project. This willalso involve advertising the project forexpressions of interest from contractors.

When the VEC has completed this work myDepartment will be in contact with it regardingthe invitation of tenders from short-listed con-tractors. Subject to a satisfactory outcome to thetender process the project will then be proceedingto construction.

School Accommodation.

192. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science the amount allocated to aschool (details supplied) in County Kildare forthe provision of temporary accommodation; if theaccommodation is a double or single prefab; andwhen the prefab will be in place at the school.[7355/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): I am pleased to inform the Deputy thatthe school in question has been allocated one76m2 temporary mainstream classroom. MyDepartment’s school building section will be con-tact with the school’s management authorities assoon as possible advising them on how to pro-gress the project.

193. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if her attention has beendrawn to the serious problem with accommo-dation at a school (details supplied) in CountyKildare; the reason she did not include this schoolin her allocation of temporary accommodation;and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7356/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The school to which the Deputy refersdid not apply to my Department for temporaryaccommodation for the 2005-06 school year norhas my Department any record of a current appli-cation for additional permanent accommodation.If the school authority has concerns about itsaccommodation, it should make contact with theschool planning section of my Department foradvice.

194. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if her attention has beendrawn to the serious problem with accommo-dation at a school (details supplied) in CountyKildare; the reason she did not include this schoolin her allocation of temporary accommodation;and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7357/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The school to which the Deputy refersdid not apply to my Department for temporaryaccommodation for the 2005-06 school year norhas my Department any record of a current appli-cation for additional permanent accommodation.If the school authority has concerns about itsaccommodation, it should make contact with theschool planning section of my Department foradvice.


195. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will sanction the invi-tation of tenders for the required extension to aschool (details supplied) in County Kildare in2005; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7358/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The building project for the schoolreferred to by the Deputy is at an early stage ofarchitectural planning.

I recently announced details of 122 majorschool building projects that will progress to ten-der and construction phase over the next 12 to 15months under the \3.4 billion multi-annual fund-ing secured for the years 2005-09. I alsoannounced the next phase of the programmeunder which 192 schools will be allocated fundingto undertake projects, such as extensions andrefurbishments. These projects will proceedimmediately, on a devolved basis, which meansthat the school authorities will control the plan-ning and construction phases of the improvementworks at their own school.

I am anxious to ensure that a consistent flowof projects to tender and construction can be sus-tained into the future. I plan to make a numberof announcements in the near future in respect ofthe school building and modernisation prog-ramme, including details of those school projectswhich will further progress through the designprocess. All projects in architectural planning,including the school in question, will be con-sidered as part of this process.

196. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will sanction the invi-tation of tenders for the required extension to aschool (details supplied) in County Kildare in2005; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7359/05]


Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): My Department is moving towards amodel of devolving the responsibility of buildingprojects to school management authorities whereappropriate. The devolving of funding to locallevel will accommodate school authorities to haveresponsibility and ownership of their buildingprojects and assist in moving projects in a specifictimeframe through the design process, to tenderaction and construction.

I am pleased to inform the Deputy that theschool in question has been included foradditional accommodation under the devolvedpermanent initiative 2005 which I announcedlast week.

197. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will sanction the invi-tation of tenders for the required renovations toa school (details supplied) in County Kildare in2005; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7360/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The project at the school to which theDeputy refers has been assessed in accordancewith the published prioritisation criteria, whichwere revised following consultation with the edu-cation partners. In this regard, the Deputy maybe aware that I recently announced the first phaseof the 2005 school building programme whichprovided details of 122 major school building pro-jects countrywide that will prepare tenders andmove to construction during 2005. In addition, Ihave further approved the next phase of the prog-ramme under which 192 schools will be allocatedfunding to undertake projects, such as extensionsand refurbishments. These projects will proceedimmediately on a devolved basis.

Further phases of the school building and mod-ernisation programme are nearing finalisationand I will be making announcements on these inthe coming weeks to include: expansion of thenumber of schools and extension of the scope ofthe projects approved under the summer worksscheme; schools that will be authorised to com-mence architectural planning; schools whose pro-jects will further progress through the design pro-cess; and details of schools identified as suitablefor construction under public private part-nerships.

198. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will sanction the invi-tation of tenders for the required 17 additionalclassrooms for a school (details supplied) inCounty Kildare in 2005; and if she will make astatement on the matter. [7361/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): Phase 2 of the extension project at theschool to which the Deputy refers has beenassessed in accordance with the published prior-

itisation criteria, which were revised followingconsultation with the education partners. Pro-gress on this project is being considered in thecontext of the school building programme. In thisregard, the Deputy may be aware that I recentlyannounced the first phase of the 2005 schoolbuilding programme which provided details of122 major school building projects countrywidethat will prepare tenders and move to construc-tion during 2005. In addition, I have furtherapproved the next phase of the programme underwhich 192 schools will be allocated funding toundertake projects, such as extensions and refur-bishments. These projects will proceed immedi-ately on a devolved basis.

Further phases of the school building and mod-ernisation programme are nearing finalisationand I will be making announcements on these inthe coming weeks to include: expansion of thenumber of schools and extension of the scope ofthe projects approved under the summer worksscheme: schools that will be authorised to com-mence architectural planning; schools whose pro-jects will further progress through the design pro-cess; and details of schools identified as suitablefor construction under public private part-nerships.

Site Acquisitions.

199. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if the OPW has investigatedthe site for the new national school for Kill,County Kildare; when a report on the site investi-gation will issue to the school board of manage-ment; when a decision will be made in relation topurchasing the site; and if she will make a state-ment on the matter. [7362/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The property management of theOPW, which acts on behalf of my Department asregards site acquisitions generally, is continuingto explore the possibility of acquiring a site forKill national school, Kill, County Kildare. Due tothe commercial sensitivities of site acquisitions, itis not proposed at this stage to identify specificsites to be acquired.

Schools Recognition.

200. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if permanent recognition of aschool (details supplied) in County Kildare hasbeen sanctioned; and if she will make a statementon the matter. [7363/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): An application for permanent recognit-ion from the school to which the Deputy refers iscurrently under consideration in the school plan-ning section of my Department. As part of theexamination, factors such as the long-termviability of the school, current and projected


[Ms Hanafin.]enrolments and suitability of accommodation isbeing considered.


201. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science when she will announce theallocation of funds towards the summer worksscheme 2005; if her attention has been drawn tothe urgent need to address the provision of acovered walkway at a school (details supplied) inCounty Kildare; and if she will make a statementon the matter. [7365/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The school to which the Deputy refershas submitted an application for grant aid underthe summer works scheme, SWS, 2005 for acovered walkway. All SWS applications are cur-rently being assessed in the school planningsection of my Department. I intend to publish thelist of successful applicants in the near future.

School Placement.

202. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if he will list the primaryschools and the number of places available ineach school in the Dublin 4 area. [7392/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The primary schools operating inDublin 4 and their current enrolment are as fol-lows: 18569J, St. Declan’s Special School, Nor-thumberland Road, 44 pupils; 15253N, SNNaomh Padraig, Cambridge Road, 130 pupils;19727G, St. Mary’s Central NS, Belmont Avenue,248 pupils; 11894I, Scoil Mhuire, DumhachTragh, 271 pupils; 16567S, St. Brigid’s ConventNS, Haddington Road, 198 pupils; 17279S, ScoilMhuire, Haddington Road, 125 pupils; 03917V,Naomh Padraig Boys, Ringsend, 92 pupils;15995L, Canon O’Hanlon Memorial School, San-dymount, 314 pupils; 18282M, SN Paroiste MaitiuNFA, Cranfield Place, 91 pupils; 18370J, Ioclannna Pailirise Sp. School, Sandymount, 56 pupils;20103V, John Scottus National School, Nor-thumberland Road 218 pupils.

The exact capacity of each school is not readilyavailable. I would like to point out to the Deputy,however, that increasing space norms, reductionsin the pupil-teacher ratio combined with signifi-cant increases in ex-quota staff in recent yearseffectively means that the actual number ofclassrooms in a school may not directly relate toits capacity.

203. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will report on the pro-jections for growth in demand for primary schoolplaces in the Dublin 4 area; the basis on whichthe calculations have been made; the consul-tations she has had with principals and boards of

management of primary schools; and if she willmake a statement on the matter. [7393/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The process of assessing the need fornew or additional educational facilities at primaryor post-primary level in any given area entailsconsideration of all relevant factors, includingenrolment and demographic trends, housing andother developments and the capacity of existingschools to meet the demand for places.

As part of this process, my Department isincluded among the prescribed authorities towhom local authorities are statutorily obliged tosend draft development plans or proposed vari-ations to development plans for comment. As amatter of course meetings are arranged with localauthorities to establish the location, scale andpace of any major proposed developments andtheir possible implications for school provision.

With regard to the planning of educational pro-vision in areas of proposed regeneration, theDepartment seeks to optimise the use of existingprovision in the first instance. It is necessary toadopt this approach due to the limited availabilityand prohibitive costs of new sites in such areas.

Officials in the Department’s school planningsection are strengthening contacts with localauthorities to enable informed decisions to bemade in planning future educational provision.For example, a specific forum, the Dublin SchoolPlanning Committee, chaired by officials of theDepartment, interacts with the Dublin local auth-orities. This forum comprises representatives ofthe local authorities in Dublin together with rep-resentatives of the patron bodies of primaryschools and works proactively in monitoringdemographic changes and their likely impact.

With regard to the Dublin 4 area, enrolment inprimary schools is in general decline and I amsatisfied that existing capacity is adequate to meetcurrent and emerging demand. The Departmenthas not been made aware of any particular diffi-culties being experienced by parents seekingschool places for their children in this generalarea.

If the management authority of any school inparticular is experiencing an increase in demandand is unable to meet this demand it should con-tact the Department’s school planning section. Adecision on the school’s application will be madeas soon as possible.

Departmental Planning.

204. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will report on herDepartment’s system of forward planning inorder to enable it to anticipate an increase indemand for primary school places in existing builtup urban areas which are undergoing significantrejuvenation, such as the area contained within


the remit of the Dublin Docklands DevelopmentAuthority; and if she will make a statement onthe matter. [7394/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The process of assessing the need fornew or additional educational facilities at primaryor post-primary level in any given area entailsconsideration of all relevant factors, includingenrolment and demographic trends, housing andother developments and the capacity of existingschools to meet the demand for places. As partof this process, my Department is included amongthe prescribed authorities to whom local auth-orities are statutory obliged to send draftdevelopment plans or proposed variations todevelopment plans for comment. As a matter ofcourse meetings are arranged with local auth-orities to establish the location, scale and paceof any major proposed developments and theirpossible implications for school provision. Thelocal authority is requested to reserve a site foreducational purposes if this is deemed necessary.

With regard to the planning of educational pro-vision in areas of proposed regeneration, myDepartment seeks to optimise the use of existingprovision in the first instance. It is necessary toadopt this approach due to the limited availabilityand prohibitive costs of new sites in such areas.Officials in the school planning section of myDepartment are strengthening contacts with localauthorities to enable informed decisions to bemade in planning future educational provision.For example, the Dublin school planning commit-tee, chaired by officials of my Department, inter-acts with the Dublin local authorities. This forumcomprises representatives of the local authoritiesin Dublin together with representatives of thepatron bodies of primary schools and works pro-actively in monitoring demographic changes andtheir likely impact.

Coeducational Schools.

205. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will report on the policyin respect of the desirability of an integratedcoeducational single management structureschools in cases in which boys and girls schoolshad previously been built side by side, on the onesite; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7395/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The position whereby some schoolsadjacent to each other operate on a single sexbasis stems from a traditional approach to pri-mary school education in this country. The vastmajority of our schools are privately owned andmanaged and the question of ethos is, therefore,a matter for their trustees. However, schoolswishing to change their status to become coedu-cational facilities or who wish to amalgamate to

form a single coeducational facility should con-tact the school planning section of my Depart-ment for advice on how to make an application inthis regard. All newly recognised national schoolsoperate on a coeducational basis.

School Inspections.

206. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science the number of inspections thathave taken place between January 2004 andJanuary 2005 in primary schools in Dublin 2, 4and 6; if the reports of these inspections are avail-able for the board of management and principalsof each school; and if she will make a statementon the matter. [7396/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): Six school inspections, involving thework of 71 teachers, have taken place in primaryschools in Dublin 2, 4 and 6 between January2004 and January 2005. In four cases the eval-uation report has been issued to the board ofmanagement of the school and to the school prin-cipal. A fifth inspection report will issue to therelevant school very shortly. In the sixth case, dueto the absence of the reporting inspector onspecial leave, issue of the inspection report hasbeen deferred until June 2005 with the agreementof the school. In addition, 32 teachers have beenprobated through the inspection process in thesame area.

Special Educational Needs.

207. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science the number of pupils who areavailing of special needs resource assistants interms of classroom assistants, teachers or otherspecial and additional provisions for the academicyear 2004-05 in each primary school in the Dublin2, 4 and 6 areas; the outstanding requests for eachschool; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7397/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The information requested by theDeputy in relation to the specific areas in ques-tion is not available in my Department. However,I would like to assure the Deputy that everyeffort is made to ensure that children with specialeducational needs receive an education appro-priate to their needs. Decisions regarding themost appropriate model of response in each part-icular case are based on the professionally-assessed needs of the individual child.

With effect from 1 January 2005, the NationalCouncil for Special Education has taken overresponsibility for processing resource applicationsfor children with disabilities who have specialeducational needs and in particular it is respon-sible for the following: deciding on applicationsfor resource teaching hours in respect of childrenwith low incidence disabilities with special edu-


[Ms Hanafin.]cational needs at primary level; deciding on appli-cations for additional teaching support in respectof children with disabilities with special edu-cational needs at second level; and deciding onapplications for special needs assistant SNAhours.

Under the new arrangements, the council,through the local special educational needsorganiser will process the relevant application forresources and inform the school of the outcome.It is important to note that in the case of decisionson resource teaching and SNAs, the SENO willoutline the process to the school and parents,where appropriate, and will at the end of the pro-cess outline the basis on which the decision wasmade. I am confident that the advent of theNCSE will prove of major benefit in ensuring thatall children with special educational needs,including those in the areas referred to by theDeputy, receive the support they require, whenand where they require it.

My Department has recently issued a circularand letter advising the authorities of primary andpost primary schools respectively, of the arrange-ments put in place as a result of the transfer ofthese functions to the NCSE. My Department iscontinuing to prioritise the development of thenetwork of special educational provision for chil-dren with special needs and I believe that thesteps taken in recent years and those currently inhand represent significant progress in thedevelopment of those services.

There are now nearly 6,000 special needs assist-ants in our schools, compared to just 299 in 1998and 2,600 resource teachers, compared to just 104in 1998. The enactment of the Education for Per-sons with Special Education Needs Act and theestablishment of the National Council for SpecialEducation have provided the key to underpin ser-vice delivery in the future.

Primary School Ownership.

208. Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science the number of primary schoolsin the Dublin 2, 4 and 6 areas which are ownedand under the control of her Department; and ifshe will make a statement on the matter.[7398/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): There are different management andownership structures for primary schools. Thevast majority of denominational and multi-denominational primary schools are owned bythe relevant patron.

Sites and school buildings for Gaelscoileannaare vested in the Minister for Education andScience. Since 1999, the state offers to providethe full cost of sites for all new schools at bothprimary and post-primary level. Where the Statebears the cost of the site purchase, new school

buildings provided on these sites would be vestedin the Minister and leased to the school operator.I will arrange for the information to be forwardeddirectly to the Deputy as soon as possible.


209. Mr. Walsh asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science if she will approve an exten-sion to a school (details supplied) in CountyCork. [7435/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): The project referred to by the Deputyis listed to proceed to tender and constructionover the next 12 to 15 months. My Department’sbuilding unit arranged a general informationmeeting for all schools at this stage to guide themthrough the process involved in moving projectsto tender and construction. The meeting tookplace on 1 February in Tullamore and representa-tives from the school in question attended.

The school in question was recently authorisedto apply for planning permission and fire certifi-cation and to request its design team to draw uptender documentation. When these tasks arecompleted, my Department will be in contactwith the school on the proceeding to tender andconstruction of the project.


210. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Edu-cation and Science the amount paid in fees orremuneration to a person (details supplied) forconsultancy or other work carried out for or onbehalf of her Department for each year since1998; and if she will make a statement on thematter. [7459/05]

Minister for Education and Science (MsHanafin): No fees or remuneration have beenpaid to the person in question by my Departmentsince 1998 or at any time for consultancy or anyother work.

Defence Forces Training.

211. Ms Enright asked the Minister for Defenceif paragraph 4 of the training instruction 17/87,which requires periodic seminars to be conductedat sub-unit level, were carried out for thoseinvolved in a training exercise at the Glen ofImaal on 27 November 2001 prior to that date;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7329/05]

212. Ms Enright asked the Minister for Defencefurther to a previous question, if he is satisfiedthat exercise instructions are issued prior to thecommencement of any exercise; if he is furthersatisfied that paragraph 4 was properly followed;and if he will make a statement on the matter.[7330/05]


Minister for Defence (Mr. O’Dea): I proposeto take Questions Nos. 211 and 212 together.

The items referred to in the Deputy’s questionsare matters for consideration by the militarycourt of inquiry to which I have referred in pre-vious replies to the House on this incident. Thecourt of inquiry will be held following completionof the civil legal action which has been initiated.


213. Ms Burton asked the Minister for Defencethe amount paid in fees or remuneration to a per-son (details supplied) for consultancy or otherwork carried out for or on behalf of his Depart-ment for each year since 1998; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7460/05]

Minister for Defence (Mr. O’Dea): As no con-sultancy or other work was carried out for or onbehalf of my Department by the person referredto by the Deputy, the payment of fees orremuneration does not arise.

Defence Forces Personnel.

214. Mr. Stanton asked the Minister forDefence if the integrated personal managementsystem report has been completed; when heexpects to be in a position to sanction the nextcommissioning from the ranks late course; and ifhe will make a statement on the matter.[7468/05]

Minister for Defence (Mr. O’Dea): The WhitePaper on Defence and the programme forGovernment recognise the importance of offeringrewarding and challenging careers to DefenceForces personnel. In this regard, both provide forthe preparation of an updated and comprehen-sive plan for an integrated personnel manage-ment system, IPMS, to address this and relatedissues. Initial proposals for an IPMS weredeveloped by the military authorities and thenreferred to the top level civil-military strategicmanagement committee for further development.

Following that process, key IPMS elements arenow being implemented in agreement with therepresentative associations in the context of Sus-taining Progress. It is intended that the processwill be further developed in the context of theproposed development of a Defence Forceshuman resources strategy which will provide theoverall framework to address all personnel issues,including those raised in the IPMS.

It is against that broad background that dis-cussions are now taking place with the represen-tative associations on the induction of officers tothe Permanent Defence Force — Army, NavalService and Air Corps. The question of com-missioning from the ranks, CFR, is being con-sidered in the context of those discussions. Icannot say at this stage when any CFR compe-tition might take place.

Regional Road Network.

215. Mr. O’Dowd asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government ifhe will make a statement on the proposed bridgeat Narrow Water, County Louth. [7372/05]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): The initial selec-tion and prioritisation of projects to be fundedfrom non-national road grants in County Louthis a matter for Louth County Council. No appli-cation has been received in my Department fromLouth County Council for funding in 2005 for abridge at Narrow Water, County Louth. It is,however, open to the council to prioritise thisproject for funding under the EU co-financedspecific improvement grant scheme in 2006, whenapplications are sought later this year by myDepartment.

As this would be a cross-Border project, anagreement with the Roads Service in NorthernIreland would be necessary regarding the project.I understand that no such agreement has yetbeen concluded.

216. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government ifhe has received an application for supplementaryfunding for roads in the Turnings area of Straffan,County Kildare from Kildare County Council inthe context of the Ryder Cup 2006; if he willapprove a supplementary grant; and if he willmake a statement on the matter. [7378/05]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): In 2004, myDepartment paid a special grant of \1,149,103 toKildare County Council for improvement worksto two roads in County Kildare that will provideaccess to the Ryder Cup venue, that is, the Killinterchange, N7, to Straffan and Straffan to Bar-berstown Cross, R403. A further special grantallocation of \4 million has been made to thecouncil in 2005 for improvement works to theseroads.

Kildare County Council wrote to my Depart-ment in 2004 seeking extra funds of \325,000 forthe road from Straffan Bridge to Sallins via Turn-ings in the event that additional grant monieswould become available during 2004. The councilwas informed that the proposed work would beappropriate to the restoration improvement prog-ramme and that it would be open to the councilto seek approval to carry out the scheme in 2004on the basis that the expenditure could be reco-uped as a first charge in 2005 against the resto-ration improvement grant or consider includingthe scheme in the restoration programme forworks from 2005 on. The council did not proceedwith either of these options.

The council wrote to my Department inJanuary 2005, again seeking extra funds for this


[Mr. Roche.]road. My Department would have no objection ifthe council wishes to revise its 2005 restorationimprovement programme to include restorationimprovement works on this section of road oralternatively include it in its programme of worksfrom 2006 onwards.

Local Authority Funding.

217. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government ifhis attention has been drawn to the serious prob-lem facing applicants for disabled persons grantsin County Kildare; the reason he will not considermaking a supplementary sum available of \3.6million to the council to clear the backlog on thebasis of 100% funding from his Department,thereby releasing the council from providing its33%; if there was ever a previous case in which100% funding was provided in the State; and if hewill make a statement on the matter. [7380/05]

Minister of State at the Department of theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government(Mr. N. Ahern): It is a matter for local authoritiesto decide on the level of funding to be providedfor the disabled persons grant scheme in theirarea from within the allocation notified to themfor disabled persons and essential repairs grantsby my Department and to manage the operationof the schemes from within this allocation. MyDepartment recoups to local authorities twothirds of their expenditure on the payment ofindividual grants and it is a matter for the auth-orities to fund the remaining one third from theirown revenue resources with amounts providedfor that purpose in their annual estimates ofexpenses.

All authorities have been asked to indicatetheir capital requirements and proposals for thefunding of their own one third contribution forthese schemes in 2005 and on receipt of this infor-mation the available funding will be allocated toauthorities. The requirements of Kildare CountyCouncil will be considered in this context.

In relation to the provision of 100% funding,for the scheme, section 4(iv) of the Housing(Disabled Persons and Essential Repairs Grants)Regulations 2001 allows the recoupment to alocal authority of a contribution which does notexceed two thirds of the amount of the grant, or\13,546.67, whichever is the lesser. It is not,therefore, open to my Department to recoup100% of expenditure in the case of KildareCounty Council. In specific instances, approvalhas been given to local authorities to use internalcapital receipts which are surplus to the fundingrequirements of their housing construction andremedial works schemes to supplement their rev-enue provision for disabled persons and essentialrepair grants.

I am aware of the situation in Kildare. Officialsfrom my Department met with council officialslast November to discuss their operation of theirdisabled persons and essential repairs grantschemes. The council undertook to examinefurther certain aspects of the operation and fund-ing of the scheme and to revert to my Depart-ment in this regard.

Water and Sewerage Schemes.

218. Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government ifhe will sanction the tender documents for thesewerage and surface water contracts for Straffanvillage, County Kildare; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7384/05]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): These worksform part of the lower Liffey Valley seweragescheme which is included in my Department’swater services investment programme 2004-2006as a scheme to commence construction this year.In December 2004 my Department approvedKildare County Council’s proposals to proceedwith the Straffan element in advance of the restof the lower Liffey Valley scheme with a view tothe works being carried out in conjunction withplanned road improvements. The council’s con-tract documents for the Straffan works are nowunder examination in my Department and arebeing dealt with as quickly as possible.

Archaeological Sites.

219. Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Governmentwhen he proposes to make formal contact withthe National Roads Authority regarding theViking site (details supplied) in County Water-ford; and if he will make a statement on thematter. [7386/05]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): As indicated inthe reply to Question No. 183 of 24 February2005, I am at present consulting with the directorof the National Museum about directions underthe National Monuments Act 1930, as amended,concerning the Viking site at Woodstown. I hopeto be in a position to determine the matter andnotify the road authority and the NRA later thismonth.

Architectural Heritage.

220. Mr. Walsh asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Governmentthe progress he is making in securing the future ofIreland’s historic heritage, including great housesand heritage properties; and if he will make astatement on the matter. [7434/05]


Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): Statutory pro-tection of the architectural heritage is primarily amatter for the planning authorities to whom myDepartment provides advice in the exercise oftheir functions under the Planning and Develop-ment Act 2000. In that regard, I recently issuedthe architectural heritage protection guidelines toassist planning authorities in implementing thelegislation.

These guidelines include the criteria to beapplied by planning authorities when selectingproposed protected structures for inclusion in therecord of protected structures, as well as otheradvice for the performance of their functionsunder Part IV of the Planning and DevelopmentAct 2000. The guidelines also provide usefulinformation and advice to owners and occupiersof protected structures.

Under the 2000 Act, the Minister may alsomake recommendations to planning authoritiesconcerning the inclusion in the record of pro-tected structures of any particular building orstructure. Based mainly on the results of surveyscarried out in the compilation of the nationalinventory of architectural heritage by my Depart-ment, recommendations have to date been madeto 54 planning authorities covering over 11,700buildings. Inclusion in the record of protectedstructures places a duty of care on the owners ofprotected structures and also gives planning auth-orities powers not only to deal with developmentproposals affecting them, but also to seek to safe-guard their future.

A range of financial supports is available to theowners of our architectural heritage from localauthorities, the Heritage Council and my Depart-ment, and from the tax relief available undersection 482 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997.Considerable support for architectural heritage isalso provided through the ongoing conservationand presentation of the State’s own portfolio ofhistoric properties.

To further enhance the protection of our archi-tectural heritage, I am considering an initiative todevelop new methods of supporting the preser-vation of key heritage buildings. My Departmentengaged consultants to examine the question offacilitating the emergence of a national trust andother trust-type organisations which might, inde-pendently of Government, acquire and managesuch heritage properties.

My Department is at present evaluating therecommendations of the consultant’s report andI hope to bring proposals to Government in thenear future.

Departmental Expenditure.

221. Ms Burton asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Governmentthe amount paid in fees or remuneration to a per-son (details supplied) for consultancy or otherwork carried out for or on behalf of his Depart-

ment for each year since 1998; and if he will makea statement on the matter. [7461/05]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): My Departmentis not aware of any payments made to the personnamed for consultancy or other work carried outon behalf of the Department since 1998.

Traveller Accommodation.

222. Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government ifthe maximum support will be given in the case ofa person (details supplied) in CountyRoscommon; and if he will work withRoscommon County Council on the matter.[7466/05]

Minister of State at the Department of theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government(Mr. N. Ahern): I refer to the reply to QuestionNo. 1339 of 26 January 2005. The position isunchanged.

Planning Issues.

223. Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for theEnvironment, Heritage and Local Government ifhe has satisfied himself that corruption has endedin the planning process; his views on the increasein the number of cases of builders receiving reten-tions for planning breaches; and his proposals tosafeguard the planning system. [7467/05]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government (Mr. Roche): The Tribunal ofInquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Pay-ments was established in 1997 to investigate actsof planning corruption, and is continuing its work.To date, it has issued four interim reports. Whilethe tribunal has, to date, not issued recommend-ations for legislative change, the Government hasalready introduced various new measures toprevent acts of corruption in the planningprocess.

The Planning and Development Act 2000extended the existing rules relating to ethics forplanning authority staff. Part 15 of the LocalGovernment Act 2001 introduced a comprehen-sive ethics regime for councillors and localgovernment employees, which came into effecton 1 January 2003. This regime includes anannual declaration of interests, disclosure ofinterests as a matter arises, and a public registerof interests. This regime was further enhanced bythe national codes of conduct for councillors andemployees, which issued last year.

The Ethics in Public Office Act 1995 and theStandards in Public Office Act 2001 also intro-duced measures in the areas of disclosure ofinterests and conduct of public officials. Underthe Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act2001, corruption is presumed where there is proofthat certain persons in public office have receivedmoney or other benefits from a person who has


[Mr. Roche.]an interest in the outcome of decisions, includingplanning decisions.

The decision as to whether a person obtainspermission to retain an unauthorised develop-ment rests with the planning authority and AnBord Pleanala on appeal. My Department has nofunction in this area, other than potentially tooffer advice in any relevant case regarding theprotection of the built and natural heritage.

Decisions on enforcement in particular casesare a matter for the planning authorities in ques-tion. Part VIII of the Planning and DevelopmentAct 2000 greatly simplified the existing statutoryprovisions to make it easier for planning auth-

orities to take enforcement action in cases ofbreaches in the planning code.

The enforcement provisions in the PlanningAct were commenced on 11 March 2002. While itis early to gauge the impact on the overall levelof enforcement activity by planning authorities,figures on enforcement actions by planning auth-orities in 2003 indicate that there has been anincrease in the level of convictions, as comparedto 2002.

I am satisfied that the planning legislation givesplanning authorities sufficient powers to enforceplanning and development control. However, Iwill continue to keep the implementation of theenforcement provisions of the 2000 Act underreview.

vol. 599 thursday, no. 1 3 march 2005 · 3/3/2005 · 3 order of 3 march 2005. business 4 mr....

Documents