Adjournment Debate.

Health Board Allowances.

Mr. Ring

This is a very important issue. Sometimes, the media take up issues because they are supposed to fight for the underprivileged. In that context, this is an issue which affects 700 people in the State at a cost of just €4.3 million. Two years ago, in October 2002, I started to raise the issue of arrears, which were due to people in receipt of blind welfare allowance. These people were not getting the correct payment amounts due to a miscalculation of the money as outlined in circular 479.

I and others referred this matter to the Ombudsman who agreed along with the Department of Health and Children that there had been such a miscalculation and that the money was due to 700 blind people. Last year, I raised the issue of whether this money would be paid out with the then Minister for Health and Children and was informed that the Department would examine the issue in the Estimates for 2004. A fortnight ago, I raised the issue again and was informed it would be examined in the context of the 2005 Estimates.

If people inside or outside this House or union members were due money in arrears, there would be a strike. If members of a profession were involved, they would be marching outside this House. However, because this concerns blind people, there is no respect for them. However, they should get what they are due. It will cost only €4.3 million and just 700 people are involved but because they are blind no one wants to fight for them. I will fight for them. I do not want to have to ask the Taoiseach on the Order of Business in the House every day if the Government will award the payment which is due to 700 blind people. It is not right. The Ombudsman and the Department of Health and Children acknowledge it must be paid. All I am asking is that the money is found to provide 700 blind people with just €4.3 million. If we cannot look after blind people, who can we look after?

I ask the media for its help to highlight this issue — to embarrass and shame the Government into paying this money. Every day, we are told about the wonderful surpluses and about how much money there is in the State, yet we cannot find €4.3 million for 700 blind people. Shame on the Government. Will the Minister of State tell me tonight that this money will be paid before Christmas so that these people can have a Christmas box?

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. T. O’Malley)

On behalf of my colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, I thank Deputy Ring for raising the matter and giving me the opportunity to outline the position. The blind welfare allowance is part of special service for blind persons under the Blind Persons Act 1920. Guidelines referring to BWA were issued to the health boards in 1979. It is a means-tested Department of Health and Children supplementary payment, which is paid to eligible persons who are blind or visually impaired.

The allowance is paid to eligible persons from 16 years of age. To be eligible a person must be in receipt of a Department of Social and Family Affairs payment, for example, invalidity pension, old age contributory and non-contributory pension, disability allowance and so forth or equivalent social security payment from another country, or persons whose income is below the combined blind pension rate and blind welfare allowance rate and are registered with the National Council for the Blind. If not registered with the National Council for the Blind, a qualifying certificate of visual impairment from an ophthalmic surgeon must be submitted. Persons maintained in a long-term facility are not eligible to apply for blind welfare allowance. However, if a recipient is admitted for short-term care purposes, the allowance may be retained for a period up to a maximum of eight continuous weeks in any 12 month period. The current amount payable is €41.90 per week from 1 January 2004 with an increase of €4.40 for each child dependant.

In May 2000, the Ombudsman referred a case to the South West Area Health Board on blind welfare allowance. The Ombudsman highlighted a provision in blind welfare allowance related to the methodology used by health boards in the assessment of income for means purposes for blind welfare allowance. The Department of Health and Children and the national health board review group on Department of Health and Children disability allowances and grant schemes, which was established in 1999 to review allowances and grant schemes that come under the remit of the Department, agreed with the Ombudsman's interpretation of the methodology used.

However, in May 2001 the Department, following discussions with the various health boards and the Department of Finance, replied to the Ombudsman that the Department of Health and Children endorsed the Department of Finance position that procedures relating to the payment of blind welfare allowance should be based on standardisation of the existing general practice. In January 2002, the chief executive officers, CEO, group decided to amend health board procedures and commence paying blind welfare allowance in line with the methodology described by the Ombudsman.

In July 2002, the Department of Health and Children received a letter from the CEO group outlining the cost implications of the amended methodology of paying blind welfare allowance. This costing referred to a yearly cost of almost €800,000. Furthermore, the health boards stated there were arrears of €1.7 million to current recipients and €2.5 million to cover arrears for other applicants — those refused, discontinued or deceased. My Department is actively pursuing the matter as part of the overall Estimates process for 2005.

Postal Services.

Mr. Durkan

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this topical issue. When discussing An Post one should take the opportunity to praise the work it has done since its establishment. There is not an individual in any town, village or locality whom the postman or postwoman did not visit at least once a week. Sometimes he or she called every day and, in some cases, the postman was the only visitor some individuals received.

However, time passes and it now appears that difficulties have arisen for the service we have enjoyed for so many years. The past is gone and the present issues new challenges. Oddly, despite the advances in modern technology, it appears that some of the services we should have been able to use have not been availed of while, in other areas, electronic technology is taking over the job of the postal service. Nevertheless, there will always be a need for an efficient, effective and fast postal service. That is the only basis on which the postal service will be able to compete.

An Post is losing money at an alarming rate — allegedly there are losses of more than €40 million. The Communications Workers Union has carried out an assessment of the losses in An Post and it disputes their extent and the areas in which they are occurring. The union did not simply dream up those figures but arrived at them following an assessment carried out by professionals. The union's assessment must be examined to ascertain the correct position before anything further happens.

Most importantly, many small businesses depend on An Post's parcel and special delivery services, which are scheduled to be axed. These small companies cannot afford a dedicated courier service. In that context I urge the Minister, notwithstanding the work of the Labour Relations Commission and the debate that is taking place, limited as it is, to use his influence as a major shareholder in this enterprise to encourage both sides to come together to secure two important objectives, first, to prevent a postal strike in the run-up to the festive season for the sake of An Post, its workers and the community at large and, second, to undertake a thorough and independent examination of the financial position in An Post. Whatever action takes place in the future — all sides, including management and unions, accept that changes will and must take place — it should not be change for the sake of change. It must and can only be change based on sound judgment and sound business management and objectives.

I ask the Minister to use his influence to undertake that reappraisal now and to do everything in his power to ensure that the good service that was provided by An Post heretofore continues into the future.

Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (Mr. Gallagher)

It would be helpful if, initially, I outlined for the benefit of the House the position in relation to our modern day postal business generally. The postal sector has changed significantly in recent years, with the liberalisation of the European postal market and with postal operators moving from national into international markets. This has impacted on this country with partial liberalisation of the postal market on foot of EU directives and with the presence of a number of international operators in the Irish market.

The parcels market in Ireland is now fully liberalised and operators are providing high quality services. The market includes some of the biggest postal operators in the world delivering international reach to Irish business. It is to be welcomed that our strong economic fundamentals make Ireland attractive for the big logistics firms. The competitive nature of the market, with a substantial number of local and international operators, offers a range of services which largely meet consumer and business needs.

It is important that An Post is structured towards the newly emerging competitive market with quality of service and meeting customer needs the priority objectives of the company. In this regard, my colleague, the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, has made it clear to An Post that, having secured substantial price increases in the past, the company should refocus efforts on providing quality services, which is part of its universal service obligations. An Post customers expect no less, especially at Christmas. It is in all our interests that An Post continues to be a strong player in the Irish postal market.

In the circumstances following the heavy and unsustainable losses of €43 million in 2003, the restructuring of An Post is essential if the company is to return to financial stability and to continue to provide sustainable employment for its staff. The recovery strategy approved by the board of An Post sets out the basis on which the company, in partnership with the trade unions, can move forward. To progress the required restructuring, the management of An Post has, for several months, been involved in a dynamic negotiating process with the An Post unions under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission.

The LRC process is the appropriate forum at which all parties are afforded the opportunity to put forward their views, positions and vision for the future of the company. Accordingly, both I and the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, believe that any disagreements that exist between the Communications Workers Union and the board and management of An Post should be addressed through the LRC process and, ultimately, if it becomes necessary, the Labour Court. The State's industrial relations machinery is specifically geared towards mediating in disputes of this nature and I urge both sides to continue to use it to resolve issues of disagreement.

The financial situation of the company continues to be precarious and the need for restructuring remains an imperative. It is possible that the company may not suffer operational losses for 2004. However, it is important to stress that the financial position for 2004 needs to be viewed in the context of the non-payment of Sustaining Progress, large savings in non-pay costs, the once-off revenue from the European and local elections and the delay in implementing change management projects.

It has been recognised by the unions as well as the board and management of An Post that change is needed if the company is to have a viable future. The task now is for all parties to redouble their efforts to find solutions to the challenges facing An Post and to deliver the change needed to secure the position of the company for its customers, staff and the community at large.

Local Government Funding.

Mr. P. Breen

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this important matter, namely, that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government provide additional funding from the local government fund for 2005 to Clare County Council because it took over responsibility from Shannon Development for Shannon town on 6 September last, which has caused a major drain on its resources.

The creation of Ireland's first new town, Shannon, has been a major success story in the history of urban development in this country. It is now the second largest town in County Clare with a population of almost 10,000 people. The transfer of responsibility involved 68 houses and apartments, 130 acres of undeveloped housing land, water and waste treatment plants, associated distribution systems and all roads, footpaths, open spaces and landscaped areas of Shannon town. At the transfer ceremony on 6 September, the Clare county manager, Mr. Alec Fleming, promised that with increased responsibility for services in the town, the council had assigned extra personnel in its offices in Shannon and that he would ensure that the optimum level of services would be provided in the town by the council. How can the council provide this level of service if it is not given adequate resources from central Government?

I hope the Minister of State's reply will not be to the effect that the Government has provided Clare County Council with €13.1 million in 2004, an increase of 15.2% over the allocation for 2003, which represents an increase of more than 350% since 1997 because that information was contained in the reply I received to a parliamentary question I tabled some time ago. That answer is not acceptable because if Shannon is to continue to grow and prosper, major improvements in water and sewerage facilities will be needed. Estimates show that €30 million will be required to upgrade these services. A total of €10 million will be required to upgrade the Castle Lake waterworks and €20 million will be required for the Traderee Point effluent treatment plant and other associated sewerage systems within Shannon and Bunratty.

No major funding was invested in the town in recent years. Shannon Development was only a development agency and did not have the same status as the local authority. I do not intend any criticism of Shannon Development and I take this opportunity to thank it for the service it provided in the town in the past. Its immense contribution throughout the region is well acknowledged.

The maintenance of a new town such as Shannon is extremely costly. There are many green and open areas, which are costly to maintain on a regular basis. Ennis Town Council has an excellent record in terms of maintaining our county town. Ennis has won many awards in recent years and it will hopefully be crowned Ireland's tidiest town in 2005. Shannon, the county's second largest town, has the potential to follow on from Ennis. With the assistance of Shannon Town Council and Clare County Council, it can do so.

This is a timely debate because the Department of Finance will publish the Book of Estimates tomorrow. I hope the Minister of State will consider the concerns I have raised on behalf of the people of Shannon and convey my sentiments to the Minister. When local authorities are notified of the local government fund grant allocations for 2005, I hope provision will be made for the additional responsibility Clare County Council has taken on in respect of Shannon town.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. N. Ahern)

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. As he is aware, Shannon town was originally developed as an adjunct to Shannon Airport and the industrial zone in one of the most far-sighted regionalisation initiatives in our history. The development of the town was carried out by Shannon Development outside the normal local government system, although it later took on commissioner status and latterly became a town council under the Local Government Act of 2001. Although a town council, responsibility for many normal local authority functions, such as the maintenance of roads and the provision of housing, remained with Shannon Development.

The initiative was highly successful and we now have a thriving town with a great community spirit located in what had previously been a quiet rural environment. It is a proud, early example of what can be achieved through vision and decentralisation. I am pleased that my Department has made its contribution to Shannon through the decentralisation there of the vehicle registration unit some years ago. The staff of the unit and their families have provided a welcome boost to the social and commercial life of the area.

Time and developments in public administration move on, however, and Shannon Development's role was refocused some years ago. The day-to-day running of a town was inconsistent with its revised mandate. In the circumstances, a transfer of assets and responsibilities was agreed between Clare County Council and Shannon Development. The council assumed responsibility for roads, housing and water services and, in return, Shannon Development ceded income from rents, some development land and some other assets. These arrangements arose from detailed negotiations between the parties and were fully approved by the elected members and management of Clare County Council.

The motion refers to the funding implications of the change. Deputy Pat Breen is obviously already in possession of some of these figures but overall general purpose grants to local authorities have increased by 120% between since the Government came into office seven years ago. In the case of Clare County Council, these grants have been increased by 350% during that period. The grant for 2004, at more than €13 million, represented a 13% increase over the corresponding figure for 2003. These large increases in grant aid enabled the council to keep increases in its rates and charges to a reasonable level.

Details of local authorities' general purpose grants for 2005 have not yet been determined but they are expected to provide real increases on the amounts provided in the current year. In determining these grants, the Minister will take all factors into account, including the overall funding available, the increases in demands generally on local authorities, and any significant changes that can be expected in income from local sources. I am satisfied that, in all the circumstances, the grant that will be made available to Clare County Council for 2005, together with the income it can obtain from other sources, will enable it to provide a reasonable level of services to its customers in 2005. Details of their general purpose grants for 2005 will be notified to local authorities shortly.

As the Deputy stated, the Book of Estimates will be published tomorrow. The notification of grants to local authorities will issue quite quickly thereafter. Grants to local authorities are not the only source of income they have to allow them to run their business. In general, the grants from the Department account for just under 20% of councils' revenue. On average, therefore, they make up at least 80% themselves. In the case of Shannon, with its large rate base and a possible re-evaluation thereof, the Deputy may find that the gap he suspects to exist might not be there at all.

Mr. P. Breen

I am sure the Minister of State will have good news for us tomorrow.

Mr. N. Ahern

I accept the Deputy has concerns but I hope these will be allayed during the coming days.

Planning Applications.

Dr. Upton

An Bord Pleanála plays a crucial role in determining planning applications on appeal from local authorities across the country. In its functions it is independent from the Oireachtas, from local authorities and from the Minister. It is accountable only to the High Court in limited circumstances and within a specified timeframe. The independence and powers of An Bord Pleanála is predicated on its planning expertise and competence. However, what happens when An Bord Pleanála, and in particular the board members of that body, go against professional planning advice? What happens when the board members do not display the required level of competence in performing their duties or when they draft new sections of the planning code without the legal authority?

There is one chairperson and eight ordinary members of An Bord Pleanála. They carry out their duties on a whole-time executive basis. I wish to raise the consideration of one appeal by the board members of An Bord Pleanála. The address of the application is 292-294 Ballyfermot Road, Dublin 10. The An Bord Pleanála reference number is 29S.207933 and the Dublin City Council reference is 2479/04. The application proposed a change of use and re-development of a former grocery store into a two-storey public house and off-licence. The planning authority, Dublin City Council, refused the application. The council based its decision on a detailed assessment of the proposal by a professional planner. It also followed a site visit to the location in question. The applicant appealed the decision to An Bord Pleanála. On appeal, an An Bord Pleanála inspector, also a professional planner considered this file. The inspector undertook a detailed assessment of the application, including a site visit on 2 September. She recommended that An Bord Pleanála uphold the council's determination of refusal. The board members of An Bord Pleanála considered this application at their meeting of Thursday, 11 November 2004. Regrettably, they decided to grant permission for this development. I wish to address two aspects of the consideration by the board members of An Bord Pleanála.

In this case, the board members of An Bord Pleanála rejected two sets of professional planning advice without due care. The board members for example should have made a site visit to the location in question. An Bord Pleanála has informed me that no such visit took place. The board members decided in this case to overturn professional planning advice, yet they have not outlined sufficient reasons for their decision, nor did they investigate this matter sufficiently. The board members' decision includes the following assertion: "The Board also considered matters in relation to anti-social behaviour and public order, were matters outside the planning code." I would like the Minister to say if the board members of An Bord Pleanála have the legal basis to decide what is and what is not part of the planning code.

Section 34 of the Planning Act 2000 outlines considerations for a planning authority to take into account in assessing an application. One part of this section includes "the policy of Government, the Minister or any other Minister of the Government." However, tackling anti-social behaviour and public order are stated aims of the whole Government and of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The professional planners who assessed this application held that they should take account of anti-social behaviour and public order in considering a planning application. It also makes sense that regard should be had to crime and public order in considering any application, in the same way as traffic and residential amenity are factors.

The board members of An Bord Pleanála do not have the legal basis to decide what is and what is not part of the planning code. They cannot read into section 34 an exception that excludes anti-social behaviour and public order from planning. It is for An Bord Pleanála to decide between different competing factors within an application, but it does not have authority to exclude certain factors from its consideration. The independence and powers of the members of An Bord Pleanála are predicated on their planning expertise and competence. The board members have failed to show sufficient expertise or competence in this case. The board members also overturned two decisions of professional planners without taking any reasonable steps to justify their decision. In this case, they made their decision without even visiting the location in question. This decision of the board members also seeks to re-draft the Planning Act 2000, a task they do not have authority to do. They cannot take it upon themselves to exclude anti-social behaviour and public order from section 34 of the Act. I ask the Minister to look into this matter and do everything in his power to ensure that An Bord Pleanála carries out its functions with due expertise and competence.

Within 200 metres of the proposed site, there are 11 outlets for the sale of alcohol. There are many retail units or other facilities that would contribute very significantly to the quality of life of the residents of Ballyfermot but a super pub is not what they need.

Mr. N. Ahern

An Bord Pleanála is a body established under the Planning and Development Act 2000 to operate independently in performing its functions. Procedures with regard to appointments to An Bord Pleanála are set down in Part 6 of the 2000 Act. Section 106 in particular deals with the appointment of ordinary members of the board. Under the Act the board normally comprises a chairperson and seven ordinary members. Additional ordinary members may be appointed where the Minister is of the view that the level of work at the board is so high as to require it and makes a ministerial order to increase the membership. Both Houses of the Oireachtas must approve such a ministerial order. The board's current membership is increased by two to ten members, on foot of an order effective from 7 November 2001. This order will expire on 6 November 2006. Under section 106(1) of the Act, ordinary members of the board are appointed following nominations from six panels who are representative of a broad range of interests to reflect various facets of society. At least one member is appointed to represent each of the six panels.

The panels represent professions or interests relating to physical planning, engineering and architecture; persons or groups concerned with the protection of the environment and amenities; persons or groups concerned with economic development, and the construction industry; representatives of the interests of local government who should possibly be able to address the point made by the Deputy; trade unions, rural and local community development bodies; voluntary bodies, charities and Irish language interests. The 37 bodies prescribed under the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 to participate in the panels represent a wide range of interests in order to ensure a board membership with diverse backgrounds who can reach a view that reflects the broader views of society. It is not necessary for board members to have a planning qualification nor is it a requirement that persons nominated by an organisation should be members of that organisation. Members of the board are appointed in their own right and there is no question of them reporting back to the organisation, which selected them, or acting as a representative of that organisation on the board.

Article 65 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 provides, among other things, that within eight weeks of a request for nominations under the Act, a prescribed organisation must select not less than two candidates for appointment and inform the Minister of the reasons, in the opinion of the organisation, each candidate is suitable for appointment as an ordinary member of the board. The organisation must send a curriculum vitae in respect of each candidate and the written consent of the candidate to his or her selection.

In seeking nominations for appointments to the board, the Minister notifies nominating bodies that he will have regard to the suitability of the candidates selected by the prescribed organisations and the need to establish an appropriate balance in the overall membership of the board. Government policy on gender balance on State bodies is also taken into account in relation to appointments. One member of the board is appointed from among the officials of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. He or she must be an established civil servant under the Civil Service Regulation Act 1956. The Act also sets down specific procedures for appointment of the chairperson of the board.

These extensive and detailed provisions of planning legislation are designed to ensure an independent board and one which incorporates a broad mix of relevant backgrounds and competencies. They follow on similar provisions which have operated since the early 1980s and which were maintained under successive Governments. I am confident they are appropriate and adequate to the requirements of An Bord Pleanála in the future.

I apologise to the Deputy that her specific point is not covered in the reply. Another matter was raised on the Adjournment last night to do with An Bord Pleanála. We are public representatives. One week we think they are excellent when they make a decision that suits us and another week we think they are dreadful when they go against what we perceive to be the interests of our constituents. On the point raised by the Deputy as to whether the board has the authority and the right to define and say what is within or without the planning code, I will investigate that point and reply to the Deputy.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 18 November 2004.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 17 Nov 2004