Vol. 602 No. 2
1 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the frequency with which his Department’s website is updated; if he has satisfied himself with the quality of the website of his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11822/05]
My Department's three websites are updated regularly and new information and publications are added as necessary. Each division is responsible for ensuring the information on their own area of the Department's websites is accurate and up to date. There are four people within the Department with access to update the content on the websites as required.
The Department's websites are regularly tested for broken links and to ensure that they are compliant with the WAI level 2 accessibility guidelines. These are universal principles for publishing information on the Internet, which include the promotion of a high degree of usability for people with disabilities.
I do not recognise the Taoiseach's reply from the information that I have. The Taoiseach's site is rarely updated. For example, when I put down the question on 12 April, the most recent item under the "latest news" section was a statement dated 14 March which listed planned trips by Ministers for St. Patrick's day. The most recent speech or statement from the Taoiseach was his address to the EU — US summit on 22 February. Similarly, on 12 April, the most recent item under "news" was the Department's strategy statement for 2003 to 2005 which was posted in 2003 and the most recent item under "Government press releases" was the announcement on 25 January from the Government Chief Whip concerning the legislative programme for that Dáil session. The Taoiseach's website is meant to be the Government's flagship website. I also noticed that if a person from any part of the world wishes to log on to "Bertie Ahern", he or she is immediately transferred to the Taoiseach's website, thus establishing clearly proprietorial ownership of that office.
That is because he is the Taoiseach.
That is true. The Minister for Education and Science has reason to be grateful to him. As a democrat I accept this. However, it would be helpful to the rest of the world and to his "subjects" if he kept his website updated.
I will not argue with Deputy Rabbitte about this issue. The website should be updated all the time. For their own reasons, the departmental staff do not put up every statement. They tend to put up major statements on the programme. They do not put items up on a daily basis as I have seen for myself. The www.bettergov.ie website, which concerns modernisation and better regulation also seems to have more material on it. However, the main site provides a range of information with regard to the functions and workings of the Department. Not all the statements made by myself or the Ministers of State at the Department are put up. The main reports and issues are put on the site. I will bring some of the issues raised by the Deputy about how people are accessing the site to the Department’s attention.
2 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the role and function of the task force on active citizenship which he announced on 14 April 2005; the responsibilities of his Department with regard to the task force; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12744/05]
3 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the role of the new task force he recently announced to determine the persons among whom to promote greater participation in communities and society; the membership of the task force; when it is expected to report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13044/05]
4 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the role of the new task force on active citizenship; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14070/05]
5 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the role of the new task force on active citizenship he announced in April 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14829/05]
6 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the role and membership of the proposed new task force on active citizenship. [15225/05]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 6, inclusive, together.
It is widely accepted that the quality of life is significantly enhanced by the willingness of people to become involved and active in their communities across the wide range of issues and interests which make up our civil society. It is equally recognised that there are many pressures which can inhibit such participation. Accordingly, I have decided to establish a task force on active citizenship to advise me and the Government on the steps which can be taken to encourage active participation.
The task force, whose membership and detailed terms of reference will be announced shortly, will comprise people from a variety of backgrounds and they will be asked to draw on the experience of existing organisations, as well as academic research and international practice, to identify specific measures which we can take in the short term, as well as issues which we need to address for the long term.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
It is also important that the task force should stimulate discussion and debate about the challenge of maintaining and developing active citizenship and a participatory society. I intend that the task force should make its report within six months of commencing its activity, and that the many groups and individuals with experience and views will have an opportunity to make an input to its work.
Have terms of reference been issued? Has there been a public announcement of the task force membership?
I have not announced the membership. However, a large number of organisations have pressed for this since the publication of the White Paper on volunteerism two years ago which at the time was chaired by Chris Flood. A large conference of all of the organisations active in this area was held recently. It was organised as the annual conference of The Wheel, a body which draws on representatives from a wide range of voluntary organisations. I spoke on this issue at the conference. The representatives gave me their views on the kind of terms of reference they want. More broadly, as similar developments have also happened internationally, my Department has been examining other experiences as well as research carried out elsewhere on this subject. An enormous number of organisations in the country which are active in volunteerism would like to be on the task force but it is not possible to include them all. We will let organisations nominate individuals because they are national organisations such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and women's organisations. I will try to ensure the process does not drag on indefinitely and get terms of reference that give a guideline to short-term actions. It could possibly remain in place for some medium and longer term issues. Many of these organisations have done excellent work and carried out research themselves. They are now trying to ensure that some of these issues are addressed on a national basis. The annual conference of The Wheel and the papers connected with it set out what they have done and what they think the country and State agencies can do. We will base the terms of reference on the papers submitted at the annual conference.
Does the Taoiseach agree that provision must be made not just for the great, the good, the rich and the powerful but also for the disadvantaged and marginalised in any true civic republican concept of citizenship? In that sense, does he acknowledge there is a conflict between his allegiance to this concept and the decision by the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív, and the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Noel Ahern, to stop core funding for an organisation like the Community Workers Co-operative? This organisation has promoted active citizenship, focusing on issues of disadvantage and exclusion and yet its very existence is threatened by the removal of core funding by the Government.
There is already extensive public funding of voluntary organisations across a wide range of Departments and the majority of jobs in voluntary organisations are directly supported by public funds. Some people have even argued that this tips the balance away from direct voluntary participation in some organisations. I do not subscribe to that view because I do not see how organisations can raise funds for their own positions and salaries. It is important that an initiative in direct community and voluntary effort should be supported and the terms upon which public funds are made available should be promulgated widely and made capable of being assessed in the most consumer-friendly way possible, consistent with the proper rules.
With regard to the decision by the Minister of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs to cease core funding for the Community Workers Co-operative, the particular form of funding which was involved in the co-operative movement had criteria attached to it. The Minister and his Department are responsible for ensuring these criteria are met. I had planned on finding out more about this particular case yesterday because Deputy Rabbitte had highlighted it, but I will check on it for the Deputy. I am not in position to give information about the decision or the criteria that were used to judge the co-operative's application. An issue that arises with many of these organisations, although I do not know if it applies to this particular organisation, is that they are established on a pilot basis for a few years and then immediately wish to become mainstream, which is another major problem. I know that the Community Workers Co-operative is eligible to apply for funding under many other headings and I am sure it will examine that. I think I advised it to do so when it wrote to me some time ago. However, I will check on what is the latest position.
I read the Taoiseach's speech at The Wheel, which was well-written. In it, he said "Happy the society that has people who act rather than lament, who organise rather than complain, who accept a personal responsibility rather than walk by on the other side". This a very deep sentiment. In that context, I wish to raise three issues with him.
It appears that one of the consequences of the individualisation of tax has been that many women who used to be involved in voluntary work and who returned to the workforce no longer have the time to engage in voluntary work. Many voluntary organisations are now forced to raise money to pay for what was done on a voluntary basis before as a consequence of tax individualisation. Does the Taoiseach regard this as a consequence or a problem?
The Taoiseach stated that the country requires a civic and participative society where people are involved in the actions of a progressive society. In many communities, where groups get together to work for objectives or targets, for example, community crèche facilities, when they do the work and go through all the necessary processes and get their facility, in most cases, they find themselves hamstrung by serious water charges and commercial rates. Is this not a contradiction in that the State wants to help communities to help themselves but through helping them, burdens them with demands they cannot meet?
Yesterday, Young Fine Gael identified the issue of social isolation and psychological pain as two very important factors in our rates of suicide and depression. Will the task force examine this area because it appears there is a considerable amount of people whose lives are emotionally shattered and who, because of lack of services, are not in a position to contribute to the kind of society the Taoiseach so eloquently spoke about in his speech at The Wheel?
I accept there are deep social and cultural factors which can hamper people's participation in various organisations. For example, a change in work and community patterns is a major factor in that. However, there are examples of sporting, cultural and social organisations which have an enormous impact on people's lives and whose members put in a considerable amount of effort into their work. It is not just the result of the work cycle. The busiest organisations are often run by people who, on the surface, should not have the time for them. At the same time, there are organisations whose members are not really involved in anything or are unemployed and who contribute a few hours to the organisation's activities but it does not work. I used to complain that the places in my constituency with the highest unemployment rates, which thankfully have decreased, had clubs that found it hardest to recruit managers and mentors to run them.
I accept that there are problems. Issues like personal responsibility, liability, access to support, advice, recognition and encouragement need to be examined. Public liability is probably the biggest factor in dissuading people from voluntary work because insurance issues crop up regardless of the work that is being done. If someone wishes to run a dance, music or contact sport class, the first thing he or she faces is insurance. A person almost ends up becoming an actuary rather than a trainer.
There is an enormous amount of goodwill in organisations and with some collective thinking, they can possibly give some new insights into the best way to proceed. It is the best practice of good organisations that will raise standards in other organisations.
Deputy Kenny's remarks about suicide and related issues are important. I read last week's debate in the House on suicide. While the figures are down on five or six years ago, they are still alarming. On questions the Deputy asked me, I recently read the detailed report of one of the alcohol association groups, which made 77 recommendations. The report's contents, including case studies on suicides, are devastating. I will not claim to be an expert in this field but isolation and alcohol, which are the causes in other countries, seem to be the growing causes here based on the evidence of some of these surveys. The matter requires more research but, subject to correction of the record, post mortems found that over 90% of suicide cases had alcohol in their systems. Of these, the amount of alcohol was large in almost 40%. Much of this is related to alcohol usage in the home. I am not an expert but the figures indicate a trend of isolation and not pub culture.
There is a connection that requires research, of which there is much according to last week's Official Report. The Government is rightly funding much of this research. Organisations have told me of their many good practices. They believe that, by working together, they can get young and old people in a wider base in the community to actively participate. This good practice could aid the lifestyles of young and old people in particular. Great work is being done with bowls, a hugely competitive game which does not involve great costs, during the winter for older people. Many people say a small amount of money for these areas would make for more active lifestyles, which is an interesting point.
I welcome the new task force on active citizenship. Does the Taoiseach regard the work of the task force as including the proposal of indicators that might be useful in respect of levels of involvement by people in community life and preventing the type of problems he referred to? Will he consider quality of life indicators as aspects of the terms of reference? Suggestions include young people's involvement in organisations or voter turnouts, which is one we are well aware of. A number of indicators from Scandinavian countries would form a useful guideline for quality of life indicators.
Deputy Kenny has referred often to an issue regarding younger people. They are displaying a trend of less involvement in community activity. Will the Minister for Education and Science consider the work being done by a number of student councils in terms of citizenship?
The Deputy should ask his question of the Minister at the appropriate time.
I will as I do not wish to short circuit the process. The Minister's presence reminded me about issues such as the weight of schoolbags and others that are pertinent to the many students who contact me from time to time. Is the Taoiseach open to suggestions from the task force such as lowering voting age to tackle the low voter turnout we are all suffering at present? Will the Taoiseach see the task force's role in the system as advisory or something beyond this?
The Deputy mentioned Scandinavian models and is correct that there is substantial literature on the matter, which has been considered by a number of international bodies. I read some of the recommendations of a good report from the OECD. The task force will consult recognised international experts in this field, many of whom have been working on this here and in other countries for a long time. In the Scandinavian model, organisations tend to work well together, which is not always the case here. I understand people will fight for their patch but the models require working in an integrated way. However, we can examine what is being done.
The Minister for Education and Science has and continues to actively support schools engaged in the civic civil political association and getting students involved at a younger age, voting for their councils, participating on them etc. The Minister is actively interested in this. Regarding many other organisations, we are lucky that Ireland is still ahead in terms of people who want to be active in groups, for example, historical, cultural, social, sporting and other groups. This is about recognition. People believe their civic society engagement should be given support and that their good ideas and works should be expanded nationally. They make the point that Northern Ireland should be included, which I support.
Presumably, many people who have already voluntarily invested much of their time in giving to society will invest time in this. Has the Taoiseach given them an indication that there will be results from this investment? I refer to the suicide task force matter raised by Deputy Kenny. The task force reported seven years ago but only a small number of its recommendations have been implemented. Has the Taoiseach told the new task force that its recommendations will be translated into action?
Yes, otherwise people's efforts will be pointless. Encouragingly, many recommendations from the White Paper on supporting voluntary activity have been taken by various Government and statutory agencies and are being successfully implemented. I do not wish to use monetary terms, but the amount of resources the State gives to groups is enormous. Many of these activities are now mainstream, with people who used to engage part-time, at night or on Saturdays now doing so on a full-time basis and there are huge resources, such as in premises. There are approximately 5,000 capital structures in one form or another under development around the country through voluntary groups, including sporting, cultural and caring groups. As I told Deputy Rabbitte, the types of organisations being represented are high profile. If they make good recommendations, we should act on them and I will do everything I can to ensure this happens.
7 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the further reports from Mr. Justice Henry Barron that he expects to receive in 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12745/05]
8 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to receive a report from the Barron inquiry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14069/05]
9 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the outcome of the meeting between representatives of his Department and members of Justice for the Forgotten on 13 April 2005; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14213/05]
10 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach when he expects to receive the outstanding reports from Mr. Justice Barron; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14214/05]
11 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the new commission of investigation headed by barrister Patrick MacEntee, SC, to examine questions concerning the Garda inquiry into the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14824/05]
12 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the April 2005 meeting between representatives of his Department and Justice for the Forgotten. [15203/05]
13 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to receive a report from Mr. Justice Henry Barron; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15204/05]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 13, inclusive, together.
I have received Mr. Justice Barron's report into the murder of Seamus Ludlow and I expect that, following necessary consideration, the report will be forwarded to the Oireachtas in the coming weeks.
I understand Mr. Justice Barron expects to complete his report on the Dundalk bombing of December 1975 and the Castleblaney bombing of 1976 and other incidents later this month.
The Oireachtas joint committee which examined the Barron report into the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings last year recommended the establishment of a commission of inquiry to examine matters relevant to this jurisdiction, including specific aspects of the Garda investigation at the time and missing documentation. On 26 April 2005, the Government established a commission of investigation, with Mr. Patrick MacEntee SC, as sole member, in accordance with that recommendation.
The terms of reference reflect the recommendations of the Oireachtas committee that examined Mr. Justice Barron's report. The commission has been asked to produce its report within six months.
Officials from my Department met representatives of Justice for the Forgotten on 13 April last. At this meeting, the group's representatives raised their concerns about the commission's terms of reference, especially with regard to the role of victims' representatives, and their view that there should be public hearings and public access to evidence seen by the commission.
As I have said, the terms of reference derive from the recommendations of the Oireachtas committee and the question of interaction with the families and the conduct of the investigation is now a matter for the sole member. The group also expressed dissatisfaction that the terms of reference did not extend to the issue of alleged collusion. I am fully aware of the views of Justice for the Forgotten but I urge the group to reserve judgment on the commission's work until it has produced its report.
I note from the Questions Paper that Question No. 7 is in the name of Deputy Ó Caoláin but the Chair had him put out.
He is unavailable.
Maybe we will get him back.
He is unavailable.
I understand that the Justice for the Forgotten group is unhappy with the range and remit of the investigation which has been approved with Mr. MacEntee, Senior Counsel, to investigate the Garda inquiry into the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings. Is the Taoiseach happy that this commission of investigation, which is essentially a private inquiry, will be able to deal with the matter?
Now that the British general election is over and Prime Minister Blair is back in office, will the Taoiseach raise this matter with him again when he meets him? Will he specifically raise with Prime Minister Blair the question, now being thrown about, of collusion in these bombings in the hope that full information will be given and made available for this investigation?
I understand that one more report is due in respect of the Barron inquiry relating to Dundalk, Castleblaney and the Miami Showband atrocities among others. When might this become available?
Regarding the Ludlow report, the Government wishes to publish the report to the greatest extent possible in the form it was received from Mr. Justice Barron. We will consider the report and any necessary redactions based on right to life considerations very shortly. We will publish the report as fully as possible.
The Oireachtas committee recommended that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Reform consider extending the terms of the order establishing the commission of investigation to include other aspects, and these recommendations remain under active consideration. The committee indicated that we should examine the bombings in 1972 and 1973, the Clones file and the Crinnion, Wyman, Littlejohn brothers cases. These questions will be examined.
I am grateful to the Oireachtas committee for the opportunity afforded to the relatives of the victims of the bombings to tell their stories and put forward their views. I also welcome the recent inquest into the deaths of the victims of 1972 and 1973 bombings. I welcome the coroner's report, which is currently being prepared and will be forwarded to my office when completed. The committee made a number of recommendations relating to victims which require consideration. It is clear from the testament of relatives who appeared before the committee that the response by the State at the time fell far short of what was required. This was not disputed by anyone who appeared before the committee, and I do not dispute that. However, we have made considerable progress in addressing the needs of victims, North and South, through the memorial fund in Northern Ireland and the remembrance fund commission.
The concept of a committee of investigation is a different system of dealing with inquiries. It is outlined in the legislation which we passed. The workings of it are best left to Mr. MacEntee. Obviously if he asks that he extend or examine the terms of reference, I will accept that. I followed the system right through and I will continue to do that. This is one of the first times we have used this system and if Mr. MacEntee has a view regarding the terms of reference I will not argue with that.
Regarding the question of collusion, we have raised this issue time and again with the British Government and we will continue to do so. However, I must be honest with Deputy Kenny and point out that I believe we will never be satisfied on this issue, but I guarantee him that I will continue to pursue it. The British position on this, both within its security and Government systems, and I am sure its legal system if we could ever get to it, is that it has maintained that it has made available the information that it has on the subject. The former Secretary of State, Mr. Paul Murphy, wrote to the Oireachtas committee to this effect. While I will continue to pursue this issue I honestly do not see us progressing any further on it. However, I will pursue it because it is as annoying to me as it to anyone else. The British system works perhaps on a different basis from how we work.
I welcome the establishment of the investigation under Mr. Patrick MacEntee, Senior Counsel. It was one of the recommendations proposed by the committee and by the Breen and Buchanan inquiry. However, there is considerable anger among the Justice for the Forgotten group regarding the terms of reference and a sense of frustration among the group that no action has been taken in regard to the main proposal for the establishment of a inquiry under the auspices of the British Government in Northern Ireland or in Britain to seek to establish the facts there in terms of collusion and other matters. Given that to date there has been no co-operation with the joint committee or from the British Prime Minister with the Taoiseach, although the Prime Minister now has a new mandate, will the Taoiseach raise the issue again with him? If the Prime Minister is not forthcoming and given that 12 months have elapsed since the report was first laid before this House, can we move to the next stage of the recommendations of the Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights and take the British Government to the European Court of Human Rights for failure to co-operate in any way with the investigation and the serious matters of criminality that have been raised in respect of which the findings were clearly that the perpetrators came from the British jurisdiction?
I thank the Deputy for his support for the inquiry and the setting up the committee of investigation. The Deputy is right in pointing out that following the recommendation of the committee and Judge Cory, we have also set up a tribunal of inquiry, which will be chaired by Mr. Justice Peter Smithwick. I inquired about that yesterday and I have been advised that preparations are being made to get that under way shortly. I understand that will happen in the summer.
I ended up having an unsatisfactory discussion in the springtime with the British Government on this issue. The new Secretary of State will be the fourth Secretary of State for Northern Ireland who next week I will have had the pleasure of meeting on this issue. I will raise it with Mr. Peter Hain. I will also raise it again with the Prime Minister. As I have said previously in the House, this issue is passed from whatever Minister one is dealing with, whether the Prime Minister or a Minister back into the security system which puts forward the position that it is giving all the information available but it is not like our system. I will continue to raise with the British the question on the inquiry raised by Deputy Costello and the question of collusion.
Will the Taoiseach refer to the final point of my question? He said he has raised the issue I asked about four times. Failing a positive response, the next stage of the committee's recommendations is that we take legal action through the European Court of Human Rights in the context of the British Government's failure to respond in any form to these very serious issues of criminality and murder. Is the Irish Government prepared to begin that process now?
I appreciate what Deputy Costello said. I have followed the committee's recommendations to the letter of the law from the beginning of the process five years ago. I will continue to do so because I owe it to the committee which has done a great deal of work on the matter. I need to take legal advice on how to pursue the matter but I am prepared to follow it up.
My understanding is that the terms of reference do not refer to the rights of the victims of the bombings. Arising from that, if, in the unlikely event that there is to be co-operation from Justice for the Forgotten and there is some quid pro quo, is it the case that lawyers’ fees will be paid as is the case for the Garda and Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform lawyers? Will these issues be on the table? While I do not want to go over the ground of the Good Friday Agreement and the lack of co-operation from the British Government, on the basis that we do not have much time, is the Government open to the suggestion from Justice for the Forgotten that the case should ultimately be brought to Europe and is it prepared to assist the group financially or in any other way? Given that it is not to be a public inquiry, is there any public component to the commission’s hearings, which might at least answer some of the criticism that it will not be publicly accountable in the way Justice for the Forgotten would like?
The fees issue and how he will interact with the families are matters with which the sole member can now deal under the legislation. I am open to any change in this, which is why I would like the legal representatives for the Justice for the Forgotten group to stay with the case because we have all brought it much further than has been the case up to now. My Department has discussed further fees payments, and the group can discuss the matter with my Department officials which has been the case throughout the process.
One of the things about committee investigations is that they do not go on for too long. However, I will certainly follow the recommendations of the sole member. I will not take issue with anything he wishes to say in this regard.
