Written Answers Nos. 108-120
108. Deputy John Paul Phelan asked the Minister for Education and Skills the position regarding the planning process for the proposed extension to two schools (details supplied) in County Dublin, including on foot of recent meetings between his Department and the schools. [10221/14]
View answerThe major building project for the schools referred to by the Deputy is completing stage 2(a) of architectural planning. My Department held the Stage 2(a) Stakeholders meeting recently with the Boards of Management and their Design Team. Following this meeting the Design Team are working on an addendum report in order to clarify a number of points. Upon satisfactory completion of this report, the project will be progressed to Stage 2(b) which includes applications for Planning Permission, Fire Safety Certification, Disability Access Certification and the preparation of tender documents. Due to competing demands on the Department's capital budget imposed by the need to prioritise the limited funding available for the provision of additional school accommodation to meet increasing demographic requirements it was not possible to include this project in the 5 year construction programme announced in March 2012.
School building projects, including the project referred to by the Deputy, which were previously initiated but not included in the current five year construction programme will continue to be progressed to final planning stages in anticipation of the possibility of further funds being available to the Department in the future.
109. Deputy Michael McCarthy asked the Minister for Education and Skills if a summer works scheme grant will be made available to a school (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10301/14]
View answerI wish to advise the Deputy that commensurate with the level of funding available for the Summer Works Scheme, applications are currently being assessed on a top down basis in accordance with the prioritisation criteria outlined in the governing Circular Letter for the Scheme. This Circular Letter (59/2013) is available on my Department's website www.education.ie. It is my intention to publish a list of successful applicants in early 2014.
110. Deputy Luke 'Ming' Flanagan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if he will elaborate on his statement of 7 July 2013 (details supplied) when he spoke about Bus Éireann; if his views on Bus Éireann have changed since then; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10320/14]
View answerThe reference used by the Deputy in his question is selective within a much more detailed statement on the role of Bus Éireann in the provision of school transport.
As I stated at that time, I was referring to instances in which private operators that had identified profitable routes had their buses followed around the city by Bus Éireann buses in an attempt to stymie the success of those routes. This of course referred to the provision of commercial services and not school transport services.
I then went on to outline in some detail Bus Éireann's complex and onerous role in providing the national transport system for schools which encompasses procurement and payments, assessment and processing of applications for eligibility, contractor tax and legislative compliance, child protection, design and oversight of the school transport network, collecting parental contributions and day to day supervision and monitoring of service performance, standards and safety. In the intervening period, Bus Éireann has continued to fulfil these functions in delivering some 114,000 children to and from school each day.
111. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if any study has been undertaken to determine the extent to which the River Liffey has become affected by silting, fallen trees and domestic debris resulting in impeded water flows and flooding; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10029/14]
View answerThe Office of Public Works (OPW) with its technical consultants, is currently undertaking the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme in partnership with local authorities and other stakeholders. This is a strategic approach that recognises the need, in line with international best practice, to move to a more sustainable, planned and risk-based approach to dealing with flooding problems. The CFRAM Studies are comprehensive catchment-based studies through which, following public consultation, detailed flood maps are produced and flood risk management measures are assessed and taken to outline design. These measures will be prioritised and set out in a Flood Risk Management Plan. More information on the Programme is available on www.cfram.ie.
The River Liffey is being assessed as part of the Eastern CFRAM study and the main trunk of the river from Poulaphouca down to the sea, through Dublin City, is being modelled, including a number of tributaries. The areas of significant flood risk, described within the Programme as Areas for Further Assessment (AFAs), along the main trunk which are being assessed in detail are Newbridge, Clane, Celbridge, Leixlip, Lucan to Chapelizod, and Dublin. Under the study the flood maps are based on the conditions in the river as surveyed, and so include the existing river bed levels. Culverts, etc, are modelled as unblocked (ie clear of debris). As part of the study, it is intended to undertake a high level screening exercise to identify culverts at high potential risk of blockage by debris. If silting or debris are determined to be contributory factors in increased flood risk on the river then this will be considered in the risk management plan produced under the CFRAM study. More information on the study is available on www.eastcframstudy.ie.
112. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the amount that has been allocated by the Office of Public Works to a project (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10059/14]
View answerThe cost of the project at Ballinskelligs Abbey to date is €682,052 and comprises almost entirely Office of Public Works staff wages. The project is 80% complete and will require approximately 18 months for final completion.
113. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform when funding will be allocated to projects (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10060/14]
View answerA number of applications for funding for storm/flood damage repair were received by the Office of Public Works from Kerry County Council on 21st February, 2014. The applications are currently being assessed, in conjunction with applications received from other Local Authorities. The Council will be notified of the outcome of this process shortly.
114. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the Office for Public Works has received a funding application for restoration works following recent flood damage to Greencastle shorepath in County Donegal; the amount of funding that has been applied for; if the Office of Public Works will consider providing funding to ensure that the shorepath is restored; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10063/14]
View answerThe Office of Public Works has received a number of applications for funding for storm damage repair from Donegal County Council under the Minor Flood Mitigation Works and Coastal Protection Scheme, including an application for the location referred to by the Deputy.
The applications received are currently being assessed. However, as indicated in the OPW's letter to Local Authorities on 10th January, 2014, OPW funding may be provided only for repairing damaged built flood defences. OPW funding is not available for repair of other types of damaged infrastructure or facilities such as roads, promenades, boardwalks, shorepaths, piers, car parks, etc. Local Authorities should apply separately to other relevant Government Departments and State Bodies in this regard.
115. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform in view of the wide disparity of arrangements that apply across Departments regarding departmental audit committees, if he has any proposals for a more coherent and co-ordinated set of operational guidelines for the audit committees; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10133/14]
View answerAudit Committees are an important part of the governance framework in departments and offices and the functions and contribution of audit committees are key in providing assurance to Accounting Officers regarding the adequacy and effectiveness of departmental internal control systems and procedures.
In the context of their internal audit arrangements, each Department and Office is required to have a formally-constituted Audit Committee (or in the case of small Offices that would not justify a separate Committee, they should have access to one, e.g. a Committee that covers a number of smaller Offices). Each Audit Committee is required to
- Operate under a written charter
- Have significant external representation (at least 2 members), including, in the normal course, representatives from the private sector with appropriate expertise. The chairperson of the Committee should come from outside the Department or Office.
- Prepare an annual report to the Accounting Officer reviewing its operations.
- Invite the Comptroller and Auditor General, or his nominee, to meet the Committee at least once a year.
The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is responsible for the development of internal audit policy for Government Departments and Offices and is currently preparing an Audit Committee Guidance document to provide clarity on the role of the Audit Committee, and to define and promote best practice. Following an initial consultation process, a draft Audit Committee guidance document was circulated, in December 2013, to Accounting Officers, Chairs of Audit Committees and Heads of Internal Audit Units for observations. This guidance document is now at an advanced stage and will be finalised by the end March 2014.
116. Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way the Government missed the 8 April 2014 deadline for upgrading IT systems from Windows XP, in view of the fact that the end of mainstream support was 14 April 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10135/14]
View answerThe deadline referred to in this question relates to the expiration of support for some Microsoft software systems, including Windows XP, in use across a number of Government agencies. Responsibility for the delivery of their computing services rests with each organisation. With regard to the product suite in question organisations have the option of upgrading to a more modern version or finding alternative solutions. Many have already done so including my own Department, the Department of Finance; the Department of the Environment Community and Local Government, the Department of Education and Skills, and the Department of Social Protection.
An agreement has been reached between Microsoft and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer to allow Government Departments and their agencies to avail of extended support for a range of products that will not be included in the standard Microsoft support arrangements from April 8th2014. As a result they will continue to receive necessary security patching and bug fixes to help maintain the reliability of the systems that they have deployed and to reduce the risk of these systems being hacked. A cap of €3.3 million on the total cost of such support arrangements for agencies availing of the MOU has been agreed.
The Office of the Government Chief Information Officer engaged with other public bodies and Microsoft regarding the implications of running unsupported software. The discussions focussed on the remedial measures that could be put in place and in identifying those organisations which wished to be included in an extended support arrangement.
It is up to each agency to avail of the support available under the terms of the MOU. The MOU provides them with a one-year window of opportunity for migrating their applications and hardware to a more modern and supported operating system. Any agency availing of this agreement must develop a plan to migrate from the affected products before the expiration of the agreement in order to ensure they will no longer be at risk. There will be no additional vote allocation or central fund created to meet this cost, it must be met by individual agencies from their existing budgets. Only the agency involved would be able to provide details on why they have failed to upgrade in advance of the April deadline.
117. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform when a decision will be made by the Office of Public Works in relation to securing a suitable location in the County Galway area for the provision of a heavy goods vehicle driving test centre; the reason for the delay in securing such a location in view of the urgent need for such a centre in County Galway; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10194/14]
View answerThe Commissioners of Public Works are working with the Road Safety Authority with a view to identifying a suitable location for a Heavy Goods Vehicle testing facility in Galway. It is accepted there is an ongoing requirement for an off-road HGV testing facility in the region but the provision of such a facility in an urban area is problematic in terms of identifying a suitable site with easy access to test routes etc. and also the availability of funding in the present economic climate.
118. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the site value of land and-or properties has been included in the valuation of the State assets the Government intends to sell off. [10222/14]
View answerThe individual transactions in the State assets disposal programme are subject to open and competitive processes that fully reflect, inter alia, the value of any land and/or properties connected with the businesses being disposed of and for which title is being transferred as part of the transaction.
119. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will clarify issues relating to the ownership and lease arrangements in place on a property (details supplied) in Dublin 4. [10132/14]
View answerI am informed by IDA Ireland that in 1969 the lease on Carrisbrook House was between An Chomhairle Oiluna (commonly referred to as AnCo) and the following landlords - James Osborne King, Crossgar County Down Northern Ireland, Patrick Geoffrey Corbett, London, Chartered Accountant, Patrick Henry Douglas Crichton, London Stockbroker, Right Honourable Claude Anthony Hamilton, County Tyrone, Northern Ireland and that the current landlord is Quest Capital Trustees Limited.
Since September 2013, IDA Ireland is the leaseholder, following the completion of the assignment of properties from Forfás to IDA Ireland.
120. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation the reason a person (details supplied) in County Cork has a case before the Employment Appeals Tribunal since February 2013 and has not been given a date for a hearing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10037/14]
View answerThe Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) is independent in the exercise of its quasi-judicial function and I have no direct involvement in its day to day operations. The Tribunal is one of the front-line services directly affected by the current turbulence in the labour market. The Tribunal hears claims under 18 separate pieces of legislation, some of which are lodged as direct claims to the Tribunal and others which come to the Tribunal by way of appeal or implementation of a Rights Commissioner’s recommendation/decision. I am informed that the waiting period for a hearing date at the Tribunal at the end of January 2014 in the region in question is 76 weeks. This is a reduction of 5 weeks over the past year.
I understand that the Tribunal targets those areas with the longest waiting periods and highest level of claims outstanding, within the resources it has currently available. The Tribunal has been pro-active in driving efficiencies. Divisions of the Tribunal are sitting longer, hearing more cases per hearing and seeking to manage the caseload to maximise efficiency. As part of the drive for efficiencies, the Tribunal streams cases that are envisaged to be more straight-forward. In this context the number of cases awaiting a hearing date in the region under question has been reduced in the past year by 27% and this includes new cases arising.
I understand that if the person in question believes that they have significant grounds to support an application, they may apply to a sitting Division of a Tribunal to have their case heard at an early date. This is done by completing a form available from the EAT Secretariat, having given appropriate notice to the opposing parties and appearing before a Division of the Tribunal to set out the reasons as to why this case should be expedited and heard before other cases, which were received ahead of the case in question. It will be a matter for that Division to grant or refuse the application. However, I would like to draw to the Deputy's attention that the policy of the Tribunal is to only grant such applications where circumstances of extreme urgency exist.
Notwithstanding the efforts of the EAT to reduce backlogs and waiting times for hearings, I believe the delays that users of the service are experiencing are unacceptable. This is one of the reasons why I am undertaking a root and branch reform of all five Workplace Relations Bodies. My objective is to deliver a world-class workplace relations service which is simple to use, independent, effective, impartial, cost effective and provides for workable means of redress and enforcement, within a reasonable period of time.
A new two-tier Workplace Relations structure will be established comprising two statutorily independent bodies replacing the current five (i.e. the Employment Appeals Tribunal, the National Employment Rights Authority, the Equality Tribunal, the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Court). This will comprise of a new single body of first instance to be called the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) and a separate appeals body, which will effectively be an expanded Labour Court. All complaints will be dealt with by a single body of first instance where the aim will be to have a hearing within three months from the time the case is lodged.
The preparation of the legislation which will give effect to the new workplace relations structures is at an advanced stage. My intention is to publish the Workplace Relations Bill as early as possible during the Spring/Summer Dáil session 2014 with a view to having the new structures in place during 2014.
