Although Deputy Joan Burton's matter is listed first, the Minister for Finance intends to be present and, with the tolerance of the Deputy, it will be taken later in the debate to allow the Minister to be here.
Adjournment Debate.
Medical Aids and Appliances.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this matter. I know the Minister has other business in the Houses this evening but I am disappointed she is not here to take this extremely important matter.
The HSE must immediately reverse a decision it has made and provide high-frequency chest compression vests to those families seeking them for their young children. The decision by the HSE to stop funding the vests is wrong and unjust. We should listen to carers and parents who look after their children.
A constituent contacted me with regard to her two young children, one aged 2 and a half years and the other aged ten months, who suffer from cystic fibrosis and get great benefit from the vests. My constituent advises me that the vest is a godsend and should be supported. Daily physiotherapy sessions for this woman's daughters take approximately one hour using the vest. This is in comparison to taking at least two and a half hours if she were to use conventional methods such as chest clapping. Without the vest the physiotherapy would have to be given in sequence as only one adult is available to provide it. With the vest, physiotherapy can be provided to both children simultaneously which results in a much shorter session.
My constituent's children prefer this form of physiotherapy as they can continue to play, draw or watch television when the vest is being worn rather than being tugged and moved about into various positions which is particularly annoying for young children. The vest also means fewer hospital admissions. It has eased stress in my constituent's household and allowed the girls live more normal lives. This will result in a higher life expectancy for the children.
The children's consultant and the Cystic Fibrosis Association of Ireland endorse the vests but they cannot help to fund them. Two types of vest exist, one costs €7,000 and the other costs €12,000, exclusive of VAT. In the United States, the vests are provided by private health insurance companies. It is in their interests to do so because on average it saves them $20,000 per annum due to the decreased need for hospitalisation and medication.
In Ireland, the life expectancy of children with cystic fibrosis is a mere 23 years, which is ten years less than the life expectancy of children born in the North. Various reasons exist for this, but we should be a world leader in this matter. Research in the United States shows these vests are highly effective and we should support and give hope to the adults and children affected by cystic fibrosis and their families.
The Government has let down the country with regard to this matter. Dr. Ron Pollock produced a report in 2005 and the cystic fibrosis working group has recommended a report. However, this has not been publicly produced which is shameful. Medical evidence may not exist that these vests help and improve the children but a case can be made for providing them to families where a number of children suffer from cystic fibrosis. It is less stressful for the family, particularly if there are several children awaiting physiotherapy. The Government should put its money where its mouth is in this case. We constantly hear the Government claiming it is standing up for the vulnerable, the young and the elderly. This is a prime opportunity for the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Finneran, to give us the good news this evening that the HSE will make an exception for families with several children suffering from cystic fibrosis. Otherwise, it would be cruel and callous, badly reflecting on the Government.
I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney.
The Minister has identified the need to improve services to persons with cystic fibrosis in the Estimates process over recent years. Since 2006, additional revenue funding of €6.78 million has been allocated to the Health Service Executive to develop services for patients with cystic fibrosis.
The Health Service Executive has received several requests to fund the provision of high frequency chest compression, HFCC, vests to assist in the treatment of cystic fibrosis. A preliminary review undertaken by the Health Service Executive in early 2008 did not provide a sufficient evidence base in terms of effectiveness to recommend the use of the vest.
Following on from this, a more substantive review process was conducted to enable the Health Service Executive evaluate more comprehensively the benefits, or otherwise, of HFCC vests in the treatment of cystic fibrosis. Suitable expertise in the field of cystic fibrosis was identified and a cross-directorate group, including expertise from the Health Information and Quality Authority, was established by the Health Service Executive early this year. The evaluation group submitted its report last month. It found there was not sufficient evidence at this point to recommend the HFCC vest as an adjunct therapy in the treatment of cystic fibrosis. It concluded there was no significant benefit for the vest over conventional physiotherapy.
Based on the recommendations of this group, the Health Service Executive decided the HFCC vest could not be endorsed at this time for use in the treatment of cystic fibrosis. However, the Health Service Executive is open to reviewing this evaluation should relevant evidence-based information become available.
That is unsatisfactory.
Thank you Deputy.
Architectural Heritage.
The last part of my Adjournment matter submission reads "those who perpetrated the vandalism on the Methodist church on Jones's Road, Dublin 3, are prosecuted and made to restore the church to its pristine condition".
It is unbelievable to think that in this day and age a developer could on the night 14 October use a bulldozer to begin to demolish the beautiful old Methodist church on Jones's Road in the heart of Dublin city. The local authority enforcement section served an order on the developer to desist from further demolition. Instead of desisting, he returned the following morning at 6 o'clock and proceed to continue with the demolition. The local residents were incensed and called the Garda. When the Garda arrived, the driver of the bulldozer ran away and the gardaí on the scene were unable to catch him.
It is a case of absolute vandalism and must be treated in that fashion. The local residents are up in arms that this happened. They certainly want to see this matter dealt with in a comprehensive manner. They want to ensure the church is restored to its original condition, for which there is a precedent. They also want to ensure the local authority proceeds with a civil action in this case. I understand the local authority will ensure the owner of the church is levied the cost of protecting and securing the building from any further attempt at demolition.
A prosecution of a criminal nature should take place. However, there is a problem in this regard. The maximum fine that can be imposed in these cases is only €1,904, a derisory fine. It can, however, include a prison sentence. This must be considered as well. In 2006 a similar event occurred when the Presentation Convent on Terenure Road was demolished by a developer. The local authority ordered that it be reinstated. When it was not, the matter went to court and the individual in question was fined a minuscule €1,000. The developer purchased that site for €15 million, so it was quite clear, it was worth his while to flout the law. We must ensure this is not replicated in the Jones's Road case. We must ensure this particular developer does not get away with the same act of vandalism and the same intent to make a killing on the property.
In Dublin and other parts of the country, there are many places of worship such as synagogues and churches of various denominations, which are surplus to use for their particular congregations. It is time to put a system in place to oblige local authorities to ensure every one of these places of worship is listed for protection. There should also be an audit of such churches to be recorded as protected structures. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should examine establishing trusteeships with funding to maintain these surplus buildings and ensure their appropriate use in keeping with the dignity of what they once were. This would be better than the current system where any developer can purchase the site and demolish the building, if it is not listed.
I am seeking that this particular case is prosecuted to a satisfactory outcome with proper sanctions being imposed and mechanisms put in place to prevent this happening again.
The role of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is to ensure the regulatory framework is robust and adequate to underpin the protection and conservation of our built heritage and to encourage best practice in this area.
Part IV of the Planning and Development Act 2000 provides the primary legislative framework for the care and protection of the architectural heritage. Its main features include a clear obligation for planning authorities to create a record of protected structures and a provision for the Minister to make recommendations to a planning authority concerning the inclusion of particular structures in its record of protected structures.
The architectural heritage protection guidelines, published by the Department, provide a practical guide for planning authorities who must comply with Part IV of the Planning and Development Act 2000. Chapter 5 of these guidelines contains provisions for places of public worship, including the redundancy of a building as a place of public worship. Guidance is provided on several issues including retention of the redundant building for other uses or the loan or sale of the building to another religious denomination. My Department also funds a number of annual grant schemes through its built heritage capital programme, including the civic structures conservation grant scheme, the significant places of public worship scheme, the local authority architectural conservation grant scheme and the Heritage Council buildings at risk scheme. Grant assistance under the relevant scheme or schemes may be available to places of public worship and to those that are no longer in use as places of public worship.
The Planning and Development Act 2000 imposes a number of statutory obligations on a planning authority with regard to genuine complaints regarding unauthorised development, including investigating such unauthorised developments, issuing enforcement notices and informing complainants of its decision. The maximum fines for unauthorised development have been greatly increased under the 2000 Act. In addition, the planning regulations were changed with effect from 2 July 2008 to amend the exemptions with regard to demolition. The amendment identifies various categories of demolition and site clearance works that are to be exempted from the requirement to obtain planning permission, but the associated conditions and new lower thresholds for demolition afford greater protection to public buildings. Since 2 July last, the demolition of the building referred to by the Deputy required planning permission.
I understand from Dublin City Council that there was no planning permission for the demolition of this building and that the unauthorised demolition commenced on 14 October. Dublin City Council received a complaint on 15 October, visited the site immediately and directed the contractor carrying out the demolition to cease. The contractor complied with that direction. That evening the council served a formal enforcement notice prohibiting further demolition on the occupier and a person they believed to be one of the owners. The following morning a vehicle entered the site and struck the front gable of the building, causing a further collapse. The Garda was informed and its investigation is ongoing. The council is also investigating the matter with a view to determining who was responsible for this unauthorised demolition and initiating legal proceedings. I understand the council has acted in a timely manner in this case and is taking appropriate enforcement action under the relevant legislation.
I note with interest the Deputy's suggestion for an audit of buildings and their uses and I will convey this to the Department.
Financial Institutions Support Scheme.
It is now some weeks since the enactment of the Credit Institutions (Financial Support) Bill 2008, which was introduced to rescue the banks, and it has been some days since the publication of the guarantee scheme. This Act has given extraordinary unilateral powers to the Minister for Finance, basically to do what he likes. Although he set out certain conditions which were to apply to banks joining the scheme, it would appear from notices on his own Department's website that those conditions have changed. He told us in the House that in the event of a bank going under, the first recourse would be to the bank itself, followed by the other banks in the scheme, and that there would be no recourse to the taxpayer. He repeatedly told us the scheme would be cost free as far as the Irish taxpayer was concerned. However, a notice on the Department's website indicates that apparently, arising from understandable objections by some of the bigger banks in the scheme, the banks entering the scheme were advised they would not have to unilaterally guarantee defaults by other banks in the scheme. Other Members of the House have mentioned a report to that effect in the Financial Times.
The Minister's depiction of the scheme was that it was cost free. The market take on the scheme can be seen from the fact that Irish bank shares are still tanking and have lost tremendous value. We should remember these institutions are the lifeblood of most businesses and, indeed, most house purchasers in this country. I draw to the Minister's attention the fact that NIB, which is a Danske Bank subsidiary, has written off a significant amount of bad debt. NIB added €69 million to its impairment charge in its third quarter accounts following a review by Danske Bank. While NIB holds 4% of the total amount of Danske Bank group loans, it represents 30% of its impaired loans. This raises major concerns about banks in the scheme which have more aggressive lending practices and risk having more toxic debts, particularly with regard to the construction sector.
What is the situation now? Is there a recourse to the Irish taxpayer, or are all the banks in the scheme essentially guaranteeing that any bank in the scheme will have second recourse to the other banks in the scheme? Is the Irish taxpayer now carrying the can, as stated in the note on the Department's website, for the financial markets? Will the Minister publish the terms of reference of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers and the review it is conducting for IFSRA? I repeat the question I asked previously — what is the review considering? Is it examining the issue of the accounting treatment of possibly impaired bank loans given for construction purposes, in which the interest has been rolled up or expressed in shares in the company?
My next question is about the disclosure at the weekend of possible directors' loans of €288 million given by Quinn Insurance to a related company within the group which, in turn, may have been used either by individuals or by related companies to purchase or pay for shares in Anglo Irish Bank which were being acquired through contracts for difference. Anglo Irish Bank is one of the companies included in the credit institutions scheme. I called publicly for the Minister to make a statement on this at the weekend. When did he know about this? It appears the regulator has known about it for months as a consequence of the work of the auditors. Is the regulator only now requiring monthly financial stability reports from insurance companies? Insurance companies are similar to banks and need to carry very large reserves of cash in order to pay claims.
I remember the Minister telling me when he was appointed Minister for Finance that he had a qualification in company and commercial law as part of his barrister's training. He told me he was quite expert in commercial law. Irish company law frowns heavily on the device of directors' loans. They are subject to special disclosure requirements and may also give rise to benefit-in-kind issues from a tax point of view. The Minister needs to make the position clear in the House because ultimately it is the Irish taxpayer who is underwriting all of this.
Deputy Burton has raised the issue of the serious financial consequences to the State arising from the guarantee scheme to banks and credit institutions. In the course of her contribution she raised a number of issues which do not arise within the terms of the Adjournment matter. However, I will be pleased to deal with these by way of a reply to a parliamentary question.
There can be no doubt as to the extent and depth of upheavals in international financial markets. The objective of the credit institutions guarantee scheme is to reinforce the strength of the Irish economy and the financial sector and, in particular, to protect the long-term interests of the taxpayer. Maintaining a stable banking system is at the heart of the functioning of our economy and the daily lives of everyone living in our country. The scheme is not about protecting the interests of the banks; it is about safeguarding of the economy and everyone who lives and works in this country. This support is being provided in the public interest to maintain the stability of our financial system and hence to protect the real economy from the consequences of the severe financial disruption that would otherwise arise.
In accordance with the principles of the legislation, the scheme is designed to safeguard the interest of taxpayers. The guarantee to covered institutions is being made available at a significant charge to the institutions that avail of it. The terms of the scheme will also allow the State to reclaim from a covered institution any payments under a covered institution's guarantee.
It is currently estimated that the State will be remunerated by the covered institutions for the guarantee by an amount of at least €500 million per year for each of the two years of the guarantee. The charge is risk-adjusted and is set at a level that is based on the long-term cost to the Exchequer of providing the guarantee. Moreover, the scheme is designed to be self-financing and any financial support under the relevant legislation is intended to be recouped from the institution concerned.
The charge has taken account of Government funding costs. The giving of the guarantee is assumed to increase the cost of borrowing by the State by between 15 and 30 basis points. This is estimated to amount to approximately €1 billion on the cost of ten year funding. If the cost to the Exchequer were to exceed €1 billion, the charge to the covered institutions will be adjusted accordingly.
It is clear, therefore, that the Government scheme is structured to cover taxpayer costs. This is not a free lunch for the banks. However, it is in no one's interest to impose a charge at a prohibitive level that undermines the long-term sustainability and commercial viability of our financial institutions. A balance must be struck between ensuring that the Exchequer is reimbursed for the cost of the scheme and the financial sector is safeguarded at a time of extraordinary financial upheaval. The scheme strikes the necessary balance.
The charge on covered institutions will be substantial but not prohibitive, and will be differentiated to reflect the realistic level of risk in different covered institutions. The covered institutions also indemnify the Minister for Finance in respect of any payments made as a result of claims made under the guarantee and in respect of any costs, claims, losses or liabilities incurred by the Minister for Finance as a result of providing the guarantee. The principle as stated in the scheme is that any costs would be recouped from the sector by the State over time in a manner consistent with its long-term viability and sustainability.
I note that there has been some inaccurate comment in regard to the scheme in recent days. The scheme agreed by the Oireachtas has not been changed. The market notice published by my Department stated that no legal guarantee was required under the scheme from one covered institution in respect of any other outside its group.
That is not what the Minister said.
The Minister, without interruption.
As the Taoiseach and I have made clear on a number of occasions, if it was the case that a call was made under the guarantee for an institution and not recouped from that institution, the Government would ensure that any loss experienced by the taxpayer was recouped in a manner consistent with the covered institutions' long-term viability and sustainability. That general principle is reflected in the scheme——
A big change.
No. That general principle is reflected in the scheme, and if Deputy Burton examines the scheme with care she will see that the general principle as stated, that in regard to the specific indemnification it is restricted to the particular institution, holds. That is the provision of the scheme. That was always the provision of the scheme and the market notice does not change that in any way.
The covered institutions have provided an indemnity to the Minister in connection with any payments made under the guarantee given in respect of the particular covered institution's liabilities. The indemnity does not extend to amounts owing by other covered institutions to the Minister in circumstances where the Minister is required to make a payment on a guarantee given in respect of that other covered institution's liabilities. There is no cross-indemnity. It is up to the Minister to decide how best to achieve all of the objectives of the scheme in light of the relevant factors over time.
As I have emphasised on several occasions, the over-arching objective of the scheme is to remedy the serious disturbance that might have otherwise unfolded for the economy. It is about taking whatever steps are necessary to ensure that we have a banking system that as a whole works effectively, efficiently and competitively in facilitating all the day to day ordinary economic transactions of commercial, business, family and social life. The Financial Regulator has extensive regulatory powers to supervise the conduct of credit institutions' affairs. Our company law provides a strict legal framework governing the performance of the fiduciary responsibilities of boards and executives. The Government is satisfied that alongside the powers provided directly under the scheme the relevant public bodies, and in particular the Financial Regulator, have the authority and legal power to take whatever steps are necessary to continue to look after the interests of all depositors and customers, as well as that of the State and the taxpayer, which now arises on account of the guarantee.
Deputies will be aware that in order to promote the public interest covered institutions will be required under the scheme to appoint non-executive directors from a panel approved by me. I will shortly announce the membership of this panel. Deputies will also be aware that the scheme provides protection against excessive remuneration of directors and senior executives. I will be moving shortly to appoint the members of the independent covered institution remuneration oversight committee which will oversee remuneration plans in accordance with the scheme.
Urban Development Project.
The news last week that the developers Stanley Holdings are not proceeding with the proposed new town square at Belmayne-Clare Hall is a devastating blow to the constituents I represent in the north fringe region of Dublin North-East. The proposed location of this new town square linking with the long boulevard stretching eastwards to Clongriffin town centre was to be a centrepiece of the whole north fringe new urban project. The extraordinary collapse of the deal for the 9.3 hectare site for the proposed town square is typical of the poor planning and management of the new north fringe and the continuing serious deficit in social, economic, public transport, security and other essential infrastructure of this development.
Although the huge north fringe new urban quarter stretching from Clonshaugh through Belcamp, Belmayne, Clongriffin, Donaghmede, Baldoyle and Portmarnock to the sea was to encompass 25,000 or more housing units and massive ancillary commercial development, the district is not a statutory strategic development zone, unlike Adamstown, Hansfield, Balgaddy and other much smaller new towns.
A core problem of this vast project is that it is developer-led with the two local authorities concerned, Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council, and all other agencies scrambling to keep up and insisting on the delivery of very belated public services. The area is split geographically between the administrative districts of Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council and, regrettably, there has been generally poor and only belated co-operation between the two local authorities in ensuring the delivery of key social infrastructure for this new city.
On my own proposal nearly seven years ago, the informal stakeholder body called the North Fringe Forum was established and its quarterly meetings have been helpful in chasing developers and agencies to provide essential services. Yet new residents and constituents are still waiting over five years for our new DART station at Clongriffin, our new primary health care centre, a Garda station, and a wide range of shopping, service and leisure facilities which were to be located on sites such as the new Belmayne town square.
The astonishing news that Stanley Holdings, the primary developers of Belmayne, are not now proceeding with the purchase and development of the 9.3 hectare site is another disgraceful example of the absence of integrated planning in the north fringe of Dublin city. I am informed by the Dublin City Council development manager, Mr. Declan Wallace, that the price of the site rose to €60 million under an amended section 183 provision agreed by the city council with the developer in August 2006. North central area councillors of Dublin City Council were informed in July this year that a non-refundable €5 million option clause on the site was being considered by Stanley Holdings but it appears now that the company can meet neither the full price of €60 million for the site nor even the possible down payment of €5 million.
Stanley Holdings have subsequently made an extraordinary and ludicrous proposal that they would spend €2 million in drawing up plans for a possible approved planning permission should the market take an upturn.
The Belmayne town square debacle is another shocking milestone in planning failures in the north fringe of Dublin city. The credit crunch is becoming an empty excuse for many of those failures, including the derelict and partly built district at St. Samson's, which is just north of Belmayne. The main victims of this appalling failure by a developer to discharge his responsibilities are our new residents and constituents in Belmayne, Clongriffin and adjoining areas, as even a cursory glance at the residents' message board, www.balgriffin.com, will show.
I do not have time to refer to the ongoing pyrites infill problem with which many hundreds of householders in the adjoining areas of Clongriffin and the coast are still wrestling. The appalling situation faced by young householders with defective infill problems is one of the greatest scandals in recent Irish history. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, has refused my continuing pleas to take responsibility for and action on this issue. That exacerbates the planning debacle which is the main subject of my contribution. I predict that the fallout from the pyrites catastrophe, in terms of the State's finances, will be greater than the cost to the State of the banking disaster we discussed earlier.
Even at this late stage I ask the Minister of State to ask the Minister, Deputy Gormley, to take a strong line and end the planning failures of the north fringe. This is by far the biggest urban development project in the history of the State. The Acting Chairman's own constituency was developed in a similarly haphazard way 30 years ago and he has spent his entire career trying to remedy the deficiencies of that time. I am in the middle of a similar debacle on the north side. Will the Minister, even at this late stage, call in the county manager, Mr. David O'Connor, the city manager, Mr. John Tierney, and all the relevant stakeholders and proclaim the north fringe as a strategic development zone, including, if necessary, bringing legislation before this House to take charge of the completion of the north fringe and the provision of all the key, and still missing, infrastructure? In particular, the Minister of State must ensure that development of one of the two main town squares at Belmayne proceeds. People should not have to look at hoardings and a derelict site and it is completely unacceptable that those who paid €400,000 or €500,000 for their homes are being obliged to do so.
I thank the Deputy and I appreciate the endorsement.
I thank Deputy Broughan for raising this matter.
While specific responsibility for the planning and delivery of the north fringe development rests with the local authorities involved, namely, Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council, at a national policy level, the achievement of sustainable communities is a key objective for the Government. New development must be more than just the provision of housing. Key infrastructure such as roads, water and waste water services, together with essential social, economic and amenity infrastructure and facilities, must anticipate and not follow the delivery of new housing.
The north fringe framework development plan, which was prepared by Dublin City Council in 2000, sets out the objectives for the area, the site context and the urban design framework. The plan emphasises the need for a quality bus service and the provision of community facilities, including schools, a library, sports and community facilities and public spaces, which will serve the anticipated 30,000 or so people who will ultimately live in the area. Planning permissions in the north fringe have been granted in line with the framework plan and, as such, it is clear that the provision of the community facilities mentioned in tandem with the housing development is seen as key in the development of the area.
Latest reports from the councils indicate that approximately 2,000 units are occupied and that a further 500 will be ready for occupation by the end of the year. The overall roll-out and timing of these private developments will be guided by the demand for housing and other market forces.
In these challenging economic times, the Government is determined to identify more joined-up and cost-effective ways of ensuring that developing areas benefit from the range of physical and social infrastructures that are critical to securing sustainable communities. Under my developing areas initiative, I am supporting work at central and local government level to ensure better co-ordination and timely delivery of key infrastructure and services, in parallel with housing, in fast growing strategic locations within the national spatial strategy, NSS, gateways and hubs. For example, community service shared campuses where people can easily access schools, library, sports and community services, should be located at the heart of new communities. While the public sector can deliver the joined-up thinking to make this happen, partnership with the private sector is critical in making it viable and deliverable as part of a broader roll-out of services.
In conjunction with this initiative, my Department has produced a suite of planning guidance measures to promote the highest possible standards in residential development and ensure access to the requisite range of public services and facilities. Guidance documents such as "Quality Housing for Sustainable Communities" and new draft planning guidelines on sustainable residential development in urban areas focus on the process surrounding the delivery of quality housing for sustainable communities and the promotion of better place-making through integrated planning and the delivery of quality neighbourhoods and homes.
A north fringe cross-authority-agency forum has been established to monitor progress in the north fringe. Membership of this forum includes senior officials from the two councils and representatives from local residents' groups and from statutory bodies such as the HSE, the Department of Education and Science, An Garda Síochána and public transport providers. I understand Deputy Broughan is also a member of the forum. Agreement has been reached, through the forum, on delivery of a broad range of public and community services such as the identification of sites for schools, a health centre and a Garda station. This is a viable and effective approach to ensure that development of the north fringe continues to integrate social and economic infrastructure and creates sustainable communities for the future.
As the Minister of State with responsibility for developing areas, I will visit the area in question in order to investigation the situation that obtains there. I will discuss the matter further with the Deputy.
The Minister of State will be most welcome.
The Dáil adjourned at 6.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 4 November 2008.