Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 18 Nov 2004

Vol. 592 No. 5

Adjournment Debate.

Swimming Pool Projects.

Mr. Ó Fearghail

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me the opportunity to raise the very important issue of the prioritisation of the Athy swimming pool project, on the basis of Athy's inclusion in the RAPID programme. I also thank the Minister of State, Deputy Callely, for coming to the House to deal with the issue. I congratulate him on his appointment to the Department of Transport.

It is worthwhile to outline some of the background to this project. The existing swimming pool in Athy was built in the mid-1970s and it has served the people of the town and surrounding areas very well in the interim. However, in recent years it has become apparent that substantial investment is required to bring the pool up to 21st century standards.

The public now expects to be able to enjoy use of a public pool as a family leisure facility, where a paddling pool, sauna, Jacuzzi etc. are available. These facilities do not exist in Athy where, unfortunately, disability access is also a major problem. The provision of these additional services would greatly increase usage of the facility. The original building is typical of many structures erected during the 1970s. It is poorly designed and building costs appear to have been kept to a minimum. For instance, the building has no obvious insulation. This lack of foresight has, unfortunately, led to a situation a generation later where the local authority and the Department find that almost €9.5 million needs to be spent to put a proper facility in place.

Athy swimming pool deteriorated significantly throughout the 1980s and 1990s as a result of the normal ageing of the structure and heavy usage, but a decision by Kildare County Council in the mid-1990s not to provide significant funds for maintenance, pending a major upgrade of the pool, has led to its present day state of dilapidation. The local authority, through its consultants, has looked at a number of options for providing a modern swimming facility in Athy and has determined that the cost of renovation and reconstruction of the current pool would be prohibitive. Hence the current proposal to build a new pool on the existing town centre site.

Contract documents were prepared by Kildare County Council and presented to the Department in April 2003 for the provision of replacement swimming pools in Athy and Naas. In July of this year Kildare County Council approved the raising of a loan to fund its contribution to the projects which are now expected to cost €18 million. I subsequently learned that the Department has requested that Kildare County Council prioritise one or the other of the pools in question. I understand, however, that the council continues to support both projects equally.

If Athy's inclusion in the RAPID programme is to mean anything, it should result in the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism giving priority to the submission on Athy. We all understand the significance and value of the RAPID programme. It has been accepted that certain urban areas are affected by serious disadvantage and public expenditure programmes are directed towards tackling the situation. Athy is a town which has gone through a number of years of economic and social decline, but is now showing clear signs of renewal, thanks in no small way to a number of initiatives introduced by the Government, including urban renewal, Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland investments, the aforementioned RAPID programme and, most significantly, the inclusion of the town in the decentralisation programme, which will bring 250 jobs in the Revenue Commissioners to the town. These measures, coupled with private sector investment have brought greatly improved business confidence to the town and for the first time in many decades, Athy is showing clear signs of a return to its former healthy economic condition. In light of this, the provision of a modern leisure facility is a must to continue to attract private and public sector investment.

In all major studies, quality of life has a major role to play in attracting outside investment. Athy's proximity to Dublin and the availability of relatively inexpensive housing has meant that there has been a large increase in the town's population. The town council development plan 2000 envisages a population of 12,000 by the end of the decade. The facility would also service a large rural hinterland stretching beyond the borders of County Kildare into adjoining parts of Laois, Carlow and Wicklow.

Two County Kildare swimming pool projects await departmental funding approval, one of which is located in the urban area of Naas which has a positive socio-economic profile, and the other in the RAPID designated town of Athy. The provision of both pools is well justified and badly needed. However, if there is to be prioritisation in the interest of joined-up Government, Athy needs the green light.

Minister of State at the Department of Transport (Mr. Callely)

I thank Deputy Ó Fearghail for his kind comments and good wishes regarding my appointment. I also thank him for the opportunity to outline the Department's position with regard to the local authority swimming pool programme and Athy swimming pool project.

The closing date for receipt of applications administered by the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism under the current pool programme was 31 July 2000. The aim of the programme is to assist local authorities in the provision of new public swimming pools or the refurbishment of existing pools. A total of 55 applications have been or are being dealt with under the programme. Of these, 17 are for new pools in greenfield sites, 24 for replacement pools and 14 for the refurbishment of existing pools. Grants of up to €3.8 million are available towards the refurbishment of existing pools or the provision of new pools, subject to the total not exceeding 80% of the eligible cost of the project or, in the case of projects located in disadvantaged areas, 90% of the eligible cost. The local authority must provide the balance of the financing directly or through a combination of local authority funding, community group financing, and private sector, etc.

Various steps must be taken before a decision is made to allocate moneys from the programme. Following the submission and approval of an initial feasibility study, there are four principal stages: the preliminary report, contract document, tender and construction. Technical advisers to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism and the Office of Public Works evaluate each stage and local authorities cannot proceed to the next stage of a project unless prior approval issues from the Department. Grant aid is allocated only when tenders have been approved and is capped at the time of allocation.

Contract documents submitted by Kildare County Council for the refurbishment of the swimming pool in Athy are under consideration at the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. The county council also applied for grant aid for the replacement of the swimming pool in Naas and contract documents for that are also under consideration.

Under the pool programme, projects are considered on a case by case basis and consideration is given to such issues as the number and geographical spread of projects within and between counties, whether the area is classified as disadvantaged, the viability of the project, particularly in relation to operational and maintenance issues, the overall funding package for the project and technical details. The Department's annual Estimates provision for the programme also has a significant influence on the flow of projects through the approval process.

The revitalising areas through planning, investment and development, or RAPID, programme aims to target the most disadvantaged areas for enhanced development. These are prioritised for support and, under the pool programme, prioritisation takes the form of a grant rate of 90% as opposed to 80% in non-disadvantaged areas.

The Minister for Arts, Sports and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue will review the Athy application in light of the annual capital envelope for 2005 and beyond. Deputy Ó Fearghail should speak to the Department officials as well as officials from Kildare County Council with regard to prioritisation of the most appropriate project. In that way, real progress will be made.

Public Transport.

Mr. Eamon Ryan

This issue is of national and local importance for every Dubliner. I was a member of the Dublin Transportation Office advisory committee when the Platform for Change document was presented. It set out a rough guideline of priorities for various projects, the most important of which were the metro, the DART suburban rail upgrade and the Maynooth line. The document set out third and fourth priorities. The last priority listed for consideration was the M50 upgrade. That was a sign of what could happen in the future. Unfortunately, the metro project is buried.

A year ago, the then Minister for Transport got into difficulties with regard to the Luas line at the Red Cow roundabout and suggested it should go on stilts. When that idea was rightly scotched, the National Roads Authority, NRA, cleverly positioned its M50 upgrade project as a cheap alternative to fixing the problems at the roundabout and M50. The Minister went ahead with this proposal, and the NRA came before the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport to present a €360 million project to widen the M50 and upgrade its junctions. One month later, representatives from the NRA returned to the committee and said the project would cost €590 million because of other junctions on the N2 and N3 which required work. Remarkably, the environmental impact statement, EIS, for the project, which will be presented to an An Bord Pleanála hearing on 14 December, now shows the cost to be €814 million. This amount is almost treble that originally sold to the public.

The cost is scandalous. We are spending over €800 million on a project that will not work. This conviction is borne out by details contained in the EIS and comments from the chairman of the NRA who yesterday admitted to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport that following the completion of the project to widen the M50, the motorway will be fully blocked with cars. We are spending millions of euro transferring a traffic jam from the approach roads to the M50 on to the motorway itself. The EIS shows there will be no increase of traffic from the M50 into the city centre. It is apparent from the provision of bus lanes and other projects that the road capacity does exist. We are attempting to provide orbital capacity on the M50, but the EIS and the NRA have admitted it will not work. Over €800 million will be spent on widening the motorway to six lanes and building free flow junctions, but we will have to toll approach roads or install traffic lights on them. The NRA's forecasting model has finally recognised this is mad transport planning and will not work.

The Government must take an interest in the issue. In reply to a series of letters I wrote, the previous Minister for Transport acknowledged the NRA was pursuing the project but said the Government did not have a role in the matter. He said it was an issue for the NRA, not the Government. In February of last year, the Cabinet simply noted the project. However, in response to my letter in March this year the Minister said the project was the NRA's responsibility, not his.

It is about time the Government took responsibility for transport issues and asked the Dublin Transportation Office for a free and frank assessment of the projects to be prioritised. Its Platform for Change document stated public transport projects must be top priority if Dublin is to be saved from gridlock. We should not proceed with a road project which will not work and will only continue the development of temporary roads in Dublin, making the issue of public transport much more difficult.

This project is close to contract. The Minister has approximately six months in which to realise it does not make sense and set out proper priorities. Given the history of overcharging, this project could eventually cost €1.3 billion. The money could be spent on public transport projects, which benefit Dubliners, north and south, as well as the whole country. The NRA itself now realises that paying for the M50 widening scheme will not work — it will cause jams from the first day it opens, which makes no sense. I would love to hear if the Minister of State will properly assess whether we should build this, the metro or other public transport projects first.

Mr. Callely

Deputy Eamon Ryan has made a great number of points in a short space of time to which I will try to respond. As a Minister of State and a Dubliner who represents a constituency on the north side of the city, I have a great interest in traffic issues, as does the Government, not just in greater Dublin, but in the country generally. In that context, there are areas of responsibility for the Government as well as other authorities that play a fundamental role in the overall development of what we are trying to achieve.

When I took up my post in the Department of Transport, one of the first requests I made of officials was for a tally of the number of registered cars in 1990, 1995, 2000 and 2004. In 1990, there were just under 800,000 cars and in 2004, there are just under 1.6 million cars. To try to address that growth is a serious challenge that will be appreciated by Members, and one that will not be met by road development alone. Rather, we will meet the challenge with an appropriate mix of transport to meet the demand.

Nonetheless, there has been a number of positive developments. With the integration of the functions relating to national roads and public transport in the Department of Transport, there is now scope for more effective and efficient allocation of departmental resources between both sectors. However, because of under-investment in the past there will be ongoing need for significant investment in roads and in public transport in the coming years and the necessary funding for this investment is now in place.

The national spatial strategy was published in December 2002 and, arising from that strategy, the regional authorities have recently finalised regional planning guidelines under the provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The regional planning guidelines provide effective regional land use strategies consistent with the national spatial strategy. The Dublin and mid-east regional authorities have collaborated to produce a single set of guidelines for the greater Dublin area, which were published in July this year. These guidelines recommend a number of specific actions over the next 20 years required for the further development of transport in the region. The guidelines also recommend a number of policy principles that need to be pursued in that regard. The Government has been proactive, through the NDP and the multi-annual capital investment framework, in providing for a major and sustained increase in investment in transport infrastructure and services. Major projects in both the roads and public transport areas are now proceeding.

When considering the balance between investment in roads and public transport, it is important to bear in mind that roads are the predominant form of internal transport carrying more than 95% of passenger traffic and 93% of freight traffic and accordingly, a high quality road network is of critical importance in underpinning ongoing growth and development and more balanced regional development; that a good road network is necessary to support a good bus service, which is the predominant form of public transport; and that rail-based transport offers an attractive and environmentally-friendly alternative to the bus and the car where mass movement is required in urban areas and over longer distances.

The M50, the existing major orbital route around the city, on completion of the south eastern motorway and Dublin Port tunnel next year, will provide access from the N11 to the M1 and Dublin Port. I understand from the NRA that the upgrading of the M50 at a cost of €750 million in 2004 prices——

Mr. Eamon Ryan

The correct figure is €870 million.

Mr. Callely

——will be undertaken in two phases. Phase 1 will involve the upgrading of the Red Cow interchange. When that is done, I understand there will be only two stops on that interchange. Phase 1 will also cover the Palmerstown interchange on the Galway road and the provision of a third lane on the carriageway between both interchanges. Phase 2 of the project will involve the provision of a third lane in each direction between the Ml-M50 interchange near Dublin Airport and between the M1 and N4 interchanges and between the N7 and the Sandyford interchanges. It will also involve the upgrading of the interchanges on the N2, N3 and at Ballymount.

Investment in public transport in the greater Dublin area stands at an all time high. Investment in services since 2000 include a huge amount of visible progress such as the DART upgrade, the new DART carriages, the Maynooth line, new diesel trains, the improvement in Heuston Station, the purchase of 460 new buses for Dublin Bus, the Bus Éireann fleet expansion, new quality bus corridors and the new super QBCs, the Luas lines that are now in operation and the new bus garage in Harristown. Can I just say that——

An Ceann Comhairle

I would prefer it if the Minister of State did not continue because it is unfair on Deputies who are asked to conclude after five minutes and more so on the staff who are held in the House.

Mr. Callely

I will leave the full response to the record.

Mr. Eamon Ryan

I am afraid that is not the full record. That is not the issue.

Mr. Callely

The Deputy asked what I was going to do.

Mr. Eamon Ryan

On a point of order——

An Ceann Comhairle

Sorry, there is no point of order at this stage. This is the Adjournment debate. I call Deputy Ó Snodaigh. The point I made to the Minister of State applies to Deputy Ryan too.

Mr. Eamon Ryan

There is a real question to be answered here.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Ó Snodaigh, without interruption.

Detention Centres.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh

Ireland has an obligation to protect all people without exception in this jurisdiction from subjection to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This obligation is established in article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which are now part of our national law.

We know that Irish prison conditions have been cited by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. We also know the Government's inclination, under this Minister for injustice, is to treat deportees like criminals or human garbage, with no regard for their basic rights or dignity. This has been proven recently by the adoption of a policy of mass deportation, namely, the rounding up and removal of deportees like cattle.

Cloverhill Prison is being used to detain non-nationals facing deportation. According to eyewitness information from several credible sources, these people are being held in conditions of detention that constitute inhumane and degrading treatment. If this is so, it requires immediate intervention of the Minister and the introduction of safeguards to ensure that it cannot continue.

Non-national detainees are reportedly being held in severely overcrowded conditions. Some deportees are sleeping on the floor during their period of detention, which can be up to a maximum of 56 days — four days short of two months. I have been advised that the overcrowding is directly related to the inappropriate committal of persons pending deportation. I have it from a reliable source that this overcrowding was relieved somewhat on Sunday when up to 20 regular prisoners were transferred to Wheatfield and other centres, as has happened on other occasions. These people had been sleeping on mattresses on the floor in all wings of the prison.

Reportedly, some deportees have also been denied medical treatment. In at least one case of which I have been made aware, a male Romanian epileptic had the medication to control his condition removed from him upon arrival in the facility and was denied access to it throughout his six day detention. As a result, he suffered multiple seizures during which he broke his front teeth. However, he was not provided with any medical or dental treatment prior to his deportation. Such treatment of detainees is appalling, and must not be allowed to continue.

It is also of great concern that children, including Irish citizens may be among those held in these conditions. We know that some of the Romanians subject to the mass deportation earlier this week were held in Cloverhill Prison and that some of this group who were deported had their Irish citizen children when they were forced to leave the country. Can the Minister of State confirm whether any of these Irish children were being held in detention in Cloverhill with their parents and what safeguards were in place for these children or any other minors involved?

In its report on Ireland for 2002 the European committee for the prevention of torture recommended that Cloverhill cease its practice of holding three inmates in a two person cell. The same report also stated the following about the detention of immigration detainees in Cloverhill Prison:

. . . a prison is by definition NOT a suitable place in which to detain someone who is neither convicted nor suspected of a criminal offence. In those cases where it is deemed necessary to deprive persons of their liberty for an extended period under aliens legislation, they should be accommodated in centers specifically designed for that purpose, offering material conditions and a regime appropriate to their legal situation and staffed by suitably qualified personnel.

The committee stated that the Irish Government had not at that time addressed the material conditions for such detainees as requested and recommended that the current arrangements for accommodating immigration detainees be reviewed. What is the Minister's response both in general and in light of the fresh allegations? Why has he taken no action to redress the concerns raised by the committee for the prevention of torture?

Mr. Callely

On behalf of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, I welcome the opportunity to clarify to the House the position on the matter raised.

The power to detain persons who are the subject of deportation orders is provided under section 3(1A) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended by the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000. The Act of 1999, as amended, states that detention must be for the purpose of ensuring the person's deportation from the State. Section 5(1) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended by section 10(b) of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Act 2000, provides the power to an immigration officer or a member of the Garda Síochána to arrest a person without warrant and to detain that person in a prescribed place where the immigration officer or garda suspects with reasonable cause that the person falls into one of the prescribed circumstances. Those circumstances are that the person has failed to comply with a requirement in the deportation order or the relevant notice attached to the order, intends to leave the State without lawful authority, has destroyed his or her identity documents or is in possession of false identity documents, or intends to avoid removal from the State.

A maximum detention period of eight weeks is provided for in section 5(6)(a) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended. Certain circumstances are excluded from the reckoning of the eight weeks, one of which is where the person in detention seeks judicial review in the High Court of the deportation order. However, it is quite common that a person who has applied for leave to seek judicial review would also apply to the court for conditional release as provided for in section 5(5) of that Act.

The Supreme Court in the Article 26 reference of the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Bill 1999 considered, inter alia, the expanded powers of arrest and detention which were to be inserted into the Immigration Act 1999. The Supreme Court in its decision of 28 August 2000 found that none of the new provisions was repugnant to the Constitution. In regard to arrest and detention, the court noted that the purpose of the detention was to secure the implementation of the deportation order.

The court found also that the context of the detention was important and that a person the subject of a deportation order had been through an elaborate procedure wherein their asylum or immigration status had been considered and a deportation order had been the decision. The court also identified four safeguards available to a person in detention on foot of a deportation order. These were the need for the relevant authority to note any change in circumstances which might warrant the ending of detention, the facility of seeking conditional release under the Immigration Act 1999, the entitlement to bring judicial review proceedings challenging the grounds for detention, and seeking an inquiry into the detention in accordance with Article 40.4.2° of the Constitution.

The Garda national immigration bureau, which has responsibility for the enforcement of deportation orders, makes every effort to keep the period of detention to a minimum. The current practice is that persons detained for deportation are accommodated in Cloverhill Prison, which is the most modern facility available for male prisoners in the Dublin area. While legally a number of other prisons and places of detention can be used, Cloverhill Prison is advantageous for a number of reasons, particularly its proximity to Dublin Airport and also the wide range of facilities available for those detained there.

Persons detained for deportation are treated the same as remand prisoners and are subject to the same regime and receive the same privileges as this group. In Cloverhill Prison, the deportees are predominantly accommodated together on the C division of the prison alongside other non-national prisoners.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform rejects the Deputy's allegation that conditions in Cloverhill Prison are inhumane or degrading. By contrast, it is a modern penal institution opened as recently as 1999, which was constructed to the highest standards and provides a clean and healthy living environment for inmates. The wings are spacious and bright with excellent facilities, including classrooms and workshops, provided to cater for the recreational and vocational needs of all inmates. There is a huge range of facilities available. I will not list them now, as my time is limited.

It should be clear to the Deputy, by reference to the facilities at the prison, that persons awaiting deportation, all of whom have gone through a fair process where applications for residency and asylum have been duly considered, are treated with dignity and respect at all times during their detention in this jurisdiction.

Schools Refurbishment.

Mr. Stanton

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I have raised it on a number of occasions, although this is probably the best time of the year to do so given that decisions are being made in the Estimates and the budget on spending for the next year.

Midleton CBS is an excellent school. One of my sons attends the school so I have a personal interest in this matter. Hardly any work has been done on the school since the 1970s. I am particularly concerned about the condition of the science laboratories. The gas system in the school has broken down and the pupils are now dependent on camping gas. The electrical system in the school is also dangerous. The display cabinets are DIY construction.

Given the amount of talk at present about the need to impress on young people the importance of science and technology, it is a shame and disgrace that this school and every school does not have modern science facilities. Perhaps the Minister would use his good offices to impress on the Department of Education and Science the urgent need to provide funding to upgrade the science laboratory facilities in Midleton CBS.

The school applied last year for the summer works scheme but was refused. It has applied again this year. Strangely, however, in 1998 the school authorities sought approval to build a physical education hall. Approval for a 608 sq. m. hall and a further 200 sq. m. of ancillary accommodation was granted by the Department. The school decided that if all this work was to be done it might be better to do a proper job so it entered into further negotiations. Suddenly, the project was stopped. There was no further agreement and the school was left in limbo. That is where it has been since then.

There is an issue with enrolment. The Department maintains there must be approximately 500 pupils in the school for such a project to be feasible. However, if the school's facilities are not up to standard, it is hard to attract students. It is a chicken and egg situation. This problem has been ongoing for some time. It is an excellent school with hard working staff who produce excellent results. Now, however, the school is under pressure.

I have raised this issue on a number of occasions. My colleagues in the Government parties have also raised it. The new Minister for Education and Science is the fourth Minister appointed to that Department since I was elected to the House and I have raised the matter with each of them. Each time I have received a standard reply. I hope the Minister of State does not have the same reply I was given two and three years ago. The project should be advanced but I am not sure what else I can do.

The fact that a school of this size is without a physical education hall in this day and age, given all the talk about the need for exercise to counter obesity in children, is also shameful. Much work must be done. I would be happy to join my constituency colleagues on the Government benches in urging that the sod be turned for this school. The project is badly needed and overdue.

I have raised this matter time and again through parliamentary questions and on the Adjournment. I get the same reply each time. The school was given approval for a PE hall in 1998 but that is not being built. This is the appropriate time, with budgets being decided, to raise the issue again. Perhaps the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, will consider this school and approve the commencement of work on it. Dr. Bill Harris, of Science Foundation Ireland, has stressed the importance of teaching science in second level schools and providing proper facilities. Midleton CBS, however, is like a throwback to the 1950s. That is not fair on the students and staff.

I hope the Minister of State has good news. If not, I hope he will use his influence with the Department to get something done in this urgent case.

Mr. Callely

In light of what Deputy Stanton said, I will try to be as helpful as possible. I will suggest to the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, and other Government colleagues that a meeting should perhaps be organised to consider the position regarding the application for an extension and refurbishment project received by the Department from the Christian Brothers secondary school in Midleton, County Cork, to see how best matters might be progressed.

The management authority of the school applied for an extension in May 2001. With an extension project such as that proposed for CBS Midleton, the condition of the existing school building is assessed as part of the preliminary analysis of need. Where existing provision is deemed to be inappropriate or otherwise inadequate, either a complete refurbishment is undertaken or, alternatively, brand new facilities provided.

As the Deputy is probably aware, following such an analysis at the CBS in Midleton, the need for an extension and refurbishment has been identified. The management authority of the school has agreed schedules of accommodation with the Department. The next step will be to prioritise the proposed project in accordance with the Department's criteria and to appoint a design team.

The application from the school for an extension and refurbishment is being considered as part of a review of all projects which did not proceed to construction under the 2004 school building programme. All projects are being assessed against the published prioritisation criteria, which were revised earlier this year following consultation with the education partners. The application in question will be considered in the context of the 2005 school building programme but an application was also made in May 2001.

The management authority of the school has recently made an application for installation of a gas system and upgrade of electrical works under the summer works scheme 2005. All applications for the 2005 scheme will be considered by the school planning section of the Department of Education and Science and it is planned to publish the list of successful applicants early in the new year.

I reiterate what I said earlier, namely, that I will discuss this matter with the Minister, Deputy Hanafin, other Government colleagues and including Deputy Stanton to see if it would be better to progress matters by considering both the 2005 and the 2001 applications.

Mr. Stanton

I thank the Minister of State.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 23 November 2004.