Will I wait for the Minister to come to the House?
Adjournment Debate.
Offshore Exploration.
I am not taking the matter.
A member of the staff of the House should write to Ministers informing them that they should be in the House in time for the Adjournment Debate, for which fixed times have been set possibly since the foundation of the State.
We should raise this matter with the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. This will not happen after the general election.
One of the Deputies should proceed and perhaps the Minister, Deputy Brennan, would take a note and respond to the matter. I do not mind what order I take the matters.
The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources announced in the Dáil on 4 October that he expected to appoint a Corrib pipeline dispute mediator almost immediately, yet three weeks later there is no sign of any person being appointed. The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, was quoted recently as saying he is still in the process of compiling a list of candidates. Can the Minister update us on where the search for a mediator is at? When will he be in a position to appoint a person to the role? Can he outline the reason the process has taken so long and what is currently delaying the appointment? There are some distinguished people in industrial, economic and academic sectors, who were formerly involved in politics, who might be available to take up this role. Is the Minister aware whether any of them have been approached?
The Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, said in the Dáil this morning that a decision has been made by the Cabinet on an agreed mediator. Can the Minister clarify what exactly did she mean by that? Has any decision been made on who to appoint, or was she simply indicating that a process is being pursued by the Government?
It is unbelievable that it has taken this long for the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, to seek to appoint a mediator, when it was suggested, as early as June by the Labour Party and by my colleague, Deputy Rabbitte, who is present, following the regrettable imprisonment of the five Rossport citizens, that an agreed mediation was the way to go, and that the Minister should urgently move on that as the first stage of getting the men out of prison and getting a process in train. It seems grotesque that it was only after these five decent men from Rossport had spent 94 days in prison and seemingly also after the determination of the Norwegian oil company Statoil and of the new Norwegian Government to get the men out of prison that the Minister finally decided to act on the suggestion of agreed mediation.
The key point is that a window of opportunity was created on the day the Rossport five were released. I and a large number of the membership of the Labour Party and the trade union movement marched around this town with the Rossport five. It was a joyous and hopeful occasion with the people of Dublin saluting them on their stand and hoping that an agreed resolution would be reached. We felt hopeful that Saturday afternoon and the days following. There was great goodwill on all sides to bring about a resolution to the dispute and avoid any repetition of the imprisonment of any more Rossport citizens. The Minister, however, seems to have been unwilling or unable to seize the opportunity to drive forward an agreed process of resolution at that critical juncture. Instead, he seems to have let things slide to the stage where positions on both sides seem again to be hardening.
It is possible we will end up in a further serious dispute about this matter. This complacency and lack of urgency in appointing an agreed mediator unfortunately reflects the approach of the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and the Government to the dispute over the Corrib gas pipeline. At a press conference in Castlebar on 24 October the Rossport five said that more than three weeks after their release neither the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, nor any of his officials had contacted them in regard to the mediation process. How does the Minister think a resolution of this problem will work if the Department is not in contact with the Rossport citizens and their representatives?
There have been allegations in recent days by the protestors against the pipeline, especially the Shell to Sea group, that the present mediation process is a ploy by the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and that it has a pre-determined outcome which will favour the pipeline development in its present format. I am interested to hear the Minister's views on the matter and if he thinks the scenario which involved a changed route or some relocation of the pipeline will be allowed go ahead.
If Advantica, the company carrying out the local consultation, was to find in favour of local residents how would the Department deal with that issue? It appears an important role has been played in this issue so far by Mr. Helgestad of Statoil and by the new Norwegian Government, which involves our colleagues in the Norwegian Labour Party, to bring about the release of the Rossport five. Has the Minister had contact with them in the interval? Given that time is dragging on we want to get this issue resolved. There is good will on all sides. We need a resolution. When will the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, act?
I wish to assure the Deputy and the House that the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, shares his view that mediation must be the next step forward on the Corrib issue.
The Minister is encouraged by the positive response he received from both sides, to his offer to appoint a mediator. At the time of the release of the five men it was conveyed to the Minister on their behalf that they would appreciate some time to return to normality, meet family and friends and re-adjust their lives following their imprisonment. The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, agreed to this and up to last weekend — by way of a comment in a newspaper — he has received no communication from his contacts with the men that they were unhappy with the fact that a mediator had not been appointed.
In the intervening period a number of people were approached to act as mediators. Through various contacts, a consensus emerged that it might be useful to consider the use of a professional mediation service in addition to a mediator. This is now the course of action which the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, proposes to pursue. Earlier this week, the Minister gave an indicative list of persons to lead the mediation process and both sides agreed with that list. The Minister will now select the mediator from the names agreed by both sides.
One of the important elements informing the forthcoming mediation discussions will be the report of the safety review. The safety review of the onshore upstream gas pipeline will be thorough and comprehensive and will be carried out by independent, internationally recognised experts. Advantica, the successful bidder, is a world leader in the development and application of advanced hazard and risk assessment technologies for gas pipelines.
It has been a priority for the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, that those who have views relating to the safety of the pipeline should have the opportunity to have those views considered by Advantica. Views have been invited from local residents, communities and any interested party. Advantica has visited the Corrib site, as part of its work and, as the Minister has stated, a two-day public hearing was held in County Mayo earlier this month. The hearing was chaired by Mr. John Gallagher SC and provided an opportunity for everyone locally who has concerns to express those concerns. All the safety concerns raised at the hearing are being examined and dealt with by Advantica.
By common consent, the hearings were regarded as successful and as affording to all those who wanted an opportunity to express their views. Arising from these hearings, and on the advice of his technical advisory group, the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, requested Advantica to undertake a review of the issues relating to the ground conditions through which the pipe will run and this will form part of the final report. The Minister wishes to thank Mr. John Gallagher, senior counsel, for the excellent manner in which he has conducted the proceedings. The full transcript of the hearing, as well as all the written submissions received to date, is available on the Department's website.
While the matter is by no means resolved, it is clear that significant progress is being made. The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, hopes that the forthcoming mediation process, augmented as needed by the results of the safety review, will allow all those concerned to work together to resolve the difficulties that have arisen.
Northern Ireland Issues.
I thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for allowing me to raise this important issue which I do at the request of Raymond McCord Snr. who has given me detailed information on his son's case.
Mr. McCord has suffered a campaign of intimidation and violence from the UDA. He has been beaten up and left for dead. Subsequently, he has campaigned to obtain justice for his son. Gunmen have targeted his family and he has been ordered to leave Northern Ireland. He has refused to do so. I salute both his courage and his integrity.
Perhaps it was in order to seek protection from the UDA that his son became involved briefly with the Mount Vernon UVF, under the command of Mark Haddock. In November 1997 he was battered to death and his body was dumped in a quarry. According to his father, the Mount Vernon UVF murdered Raymond McCord because he had been summoned by John "Bunter" Graham, the officer commanding the UVF on the Shankill Road, to account for his role in ferrying drugs for Mark Haddock. He was murdered to prevent Graham finding out about Haddock's unsanctioned drugs operations.
At least two members of the gang who carried out the murder were Special Branch informers. They were Mark Haddock, who ordered the murder, and John Bond, who was present when Raymond McCord was murdered. Both these men were also allegedly involved in an attempt to bomb the Sinn Féin offices in Monaghan. Haddock was originally handled by Johnston Brown, a CID officer in the RUC. RUC Special Branch later took over the handling of informers. Haddock is said to have been recruited as an informer after he murdered Sharon McKenna, a Catholic and home help worker, who was shot while visiting a friend in Mount Vernon in January 1993.
Since the McKenna murder, and while serving as an RUC informer, Haddock has been associated with the murder of Gary Convie and Éamon Fox, both of whom were Catholics shot on a building site in May 1994; Thomas Sheppard, an alleged informer shot in March 1996; the Reverend David Templeton, a Protestant clergyman who died in March 1997, having been severely beaten; Billy Harbinson, handcuffed, beaten and left to die in May 1997; Tommy English, a former UDP politician beaten and shot in October 2000; and David Greer, shot during a loyalist feud in October 2000.
The central allegation is that Haddock was not charged with any crime because he was an informer who had to be protected. He was able to act with impunity while the police effectively colluded in his crimes. Johnston Brown said in a television documentary:
If you're asking me are there people who had committed murder but got away with it because of informants, yes they did . . . If you're asking me if, on some occasions, the informants go outside those parameters, yes they did. Including murder? Yes they did. Were they protected by the highest authority? Yes, they were. . . Could we have put the majority of them in jail in 1997, 1998, 1999? Absolutely. Would lives have been saved time and time again? Yes indeed . . . There appeared to be no will to prosecute certain individuals. I couldn't understand it and I spoke of my reservations but you're a voice in the wilderness.
I understand we will hear more from Mr. Brown when his book, Into the Dark, is launched in Belfast next week.
For almost eight years the investigation into the Raymond McCord murder has gone nowhere. His father is morally certain who killed his son but the perpetrators enjoy immunity for their acts. The police need for intelligence has trumped the state's duty to protect the right of life. Mark Haddock is now awaiting trial for attempted murder. Mr. McCord understands he will plead guilty and may serve less than ten years in prison. There is no progress in any of the outstanding murder investigations. The Police Ombudsman is finalising the most difficult investigation of her career and will report before Christmas.
The question for us is what our Government should do about all of this. We are used to debating here the cases of Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson and others who come from the Nationalist community. Our commitment to those we claim as fellow nationals requires us to extend a similar degree of concern where victims come from the other side of the divide in Northern Ireland and allegations of police collusion are made.
A generation ago a British Prime Minister could summon a lord chief justice and give him the right political steer before a judicial tribunal by saying: "Remember we're fighting a war over there". The IRA throughout its murderous 30-year campaign also insisted it was fighting a war. I never believed there was a war in Northern Ireland or justification for a war. Nor do I believe there was ever justification for emergency wartime departure from adherence to the rule of law. If the statement that the war is over means anything it means that we must reassert our insistence on peacetime standards of justice, on adherence to the rule of law and on fair and impartial policing.
The Government has both the entitlement and the obligation to raise the issue of the integrity of policing within the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference. Once the O'Loan report is published, there must be an inquiry. Judge Peter Cory, some law lords in the UK, most independent commentators, the Government and I have all condemned the Inquiries Act, rushed through the British Parliament in the week before the British general election. The Government must insist upon the utter inadequacy of that legislation in delivering a comprehensive and credible inquiry. An international element is required to guarantee independence and impartiality.
Mr. Raymond McCord has lost a 22-year-old son to a violent and ruthless organisation that seems to have operated with the surreptitious sanction of the police. We owe it to him and to all others who have lost family, friends and neighbours to ensure, as best we can, that they receive justice.
As the Deputy and the House are aware, the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Ms Nuala O'Loan, has been engaged in an investigation into the circumstances of the murder of Mr. Raymond McCord and related matters. This investigation has been ongoing for the past two years. It was initiated following a complaint received by that office from Mr. Raymond McCord Snr, which alleged police misconduct, regarding the circumstances of his son's murder, which was believed to have been committed by loyalist paramilitaries.
The office of the Police Ombudsman advised us that the investigation is largely complete and that an interim report was sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland. A final report will be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland, shortly. The public report on the investigation will be released after the Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland has deliberated on the issue.
As attested by the Oversight Commissioner for Policing in Northern Ireland in his latest report published in September last, the office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland is operating extremely effectively in its crucial role. This is also the stated opinion of the Northern Ireland Parliamentary Select Committee and the inspectorate of constabulary. Most notably, there has been a steady increase in confidence, on both sides of the community, in the work of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. The Government has absolute confidence in the ability and independence of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. We are satisfied that under her guidance, the McCord case is currently subject to a rigorous investigation.
In the context of the sensitive stage the investigation has reached any comment on the possible establishment of an independent inquiry into this issue would be premature. The Government will continue to monitor developments in this case very closely and will give its immediate and careful consideration to the ombudsman's report and any recommendations that it makes when it is published. I have listened with great interest to Deputy Rabbitte's very detailed contribution and in particular his reference to policing in Northern Ireland. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is present in the House and he along with the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Taoiseach at bilateral meetings on a North-South basis and at east-west meetings with the British Government have consistently and repeatedly raised the policing issue. The Deputy can be assured that the Government and its representatives along with our excellent senior officials consistently raise the issue.
Company Closures.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter. In my constituency, the regeneration in Ballymun is a massive development that is very much welcomed by the residents. The Ballymun project is the biggest urban regeneration scheme in Europe and it is something of which we should all be proud. When I look at the new facilities for young people and families, the plans for the new shopping centre and hotels in the area, together with the relocation of so many families into new houses, it is clear that real progress is being made in establishing the new town centre in Ballymun.
The demolition of the towers has certainly been a huge part of this project for the area particularly in its symbolic importance and, in general, it has been very successful. However, last week I held a meeting with a number of Irish subcontractors who have been involved with the demolition project of the towers. Their experience in this demolition has shown another side to the regeneration.
The contract for the demolition of the high-rise blocks was awarded by Ballymun Regeneration Limited to the Controlled Demolition Group, CDG, a UK company specialising in this sort of project. Controlled Demolition has been paid nearly €6 million by Ballymun Regeneration Limited for the demolition work to date. According to the terms of the contract, CDG was then authorised to subcontract as it wished various aspects of the job to subcontractors. In this task, it chose a number of locally based, Irish subcontractors. I have a copy of the contract entered into by BRL and Controlled Demolition Group.
During the recent demolition of McDonagh Tower, there were problems on the site from early on, in particular with payments to subcontractors. As in many cases the people who were owed money were given the run around. Each subcontractor was told that someone else was holding up payments, be it BRL or another subcontractor. After a number of delays and problems the implosion finally took place on 5 June 2005. At the time of demolition, subcontractors were still owed a significant amount of money even though BRL had completed the majority of payments to CDG.
Following this implosion we received news in September that CDG had gone into administration following the withdrawal of its venture capital investor and Ernst and Young was appointed as administrator. The company was sold but since then it has recommenced trading with the same directors except for finance director. The business and assets were taken over by another company, Linkway Manufacturing Limited, which changed its own name to Controlled Demolition and has continued to perform existing contracts. I am led to believe that it resumed trading within a few hours of the sale. I understand that this practice is known as "phoenixing" in the UK.
Phoenixing occurs where the assets of one limited company are moved to another legal entity, without moving the liabilities. In this way it allows directors to declare the company bankrupt and then start up again under a new name and avoid their legal responsibilities. The problem is that we are aware of at least 15 companies that still have not been paid and have not been contacted to agree any payment plan with the new company. Many of these companies are Irish, some from Ballymun or its environs. Seven Irish subcontractors are owed sums ranging from €294,000 down to €40. One company, a security company, employed and still employs 40 local people from Ballymun. An additional six contractors are subcontractors of McDonald Brothers, the main contractor for Controlled Demolition. A further three UK companies are affected. Tom and Steven McDonald are owed €350,000; P. J. Carey — no relation to me — is owed €50,000; and Lancaster Crushing is owed approximately €206,000. The three UK companies are owed €606,000 with more than €1 million owed to Irish companies.
Recently, Controlled Demolition's managing director, Mr. Palin, stated that 90% of the company's creditors would be paid. However, the fear is that Irish sub-contractors are most likely to be the ones to lose out. Furthermore, Mr. Palin said the company's ability to pay the Irish sub-contractors will depend on the outcome of the settlement of the final account with Ballymun Regeneration Limited. A retention amount of approximately €60,000 to €65,000 is available from the contract.
I am glad of the opportunity to speak on the matter because I cannot allow something like this to happen to what is probably the most prestigious construction project in the country. Small businesses and in some cases sole traders will be badly hit by this. It is unacceptable that companies employed on a prestigious State project should go unpaid for their work. Furthermore, it is unacceptable that a company such as CDG can be allowed to operate in such a manner. I ask that the Minister intervene and assist these companies in recovering some, if not all, of the money owed to them. I also call on the Minister to review the case in terms of both European and Irish law in order that CDG can be made to settle its debts in this country.
I thank the Minister, Deputy Martin, the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ahern, and their officials for the efforts they have made on my behalf and that of the companies to date. I also thank the officials of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement for their assistance, the representatives of Ballymun Regeneration Limited and, in particular, the representatives of the sub-contractors for the assistance they have given to me in compiling their case.
We appreciate Deputy Carey's concern in this matter. The recovery of commercial debts is essentially a civil matter between the parties concerned. I do not have detailed information about the particular circumstances of this case, for example, information relating to the terms of the contracts entered into by the parties concerned or the administration procedure in the United Kingdom referred to by Deputy Carey. Furthermore, it is not clear if Irish or British law or both applies.
While on the basis of the information available, it appears that the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment has no function in the matter, nevertheless, we have considerably strengthened Irish company law, in recent years. The Company Law Enforcement Act 2001 introduced significant changes to the business regulatory environment.
One of the main initiatives of the Act was to establish the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement with statutory responsibility for encouraging compliance with company law and investigating and enforcing suspected breaches of the legislation. This remit involves communicating publicly the benefits of compliance and the consequences of non-compliance, initiating fact-finding company investigations and prosecuting persons for suspected breaches of the Companies Acts. It also involves evaluating the conduct of persons associated with insolvent companies, applying to the High Court for the restriction or disqualification of company directors and others and undertaking a number of additional initiatives, including remedial measures, as provided for in the Companies Acts.
Business failure is an unfortunate fact of life. However, the changes introduced in Irish company law, through Part 5 of the 2001 Act in particular, are intended to address the problem of dishonest business failure, in particular, what has been referred to as the "phoenix syndrome".
If the Deputy has any information suggesting that a breach of Irish company law has occurred in the above case, I ask him to bring it to the attention of the Director of Corporate Enforcement who is independent in the performance of his statutory duties and has done an excellent job since his appointment to that office.
Garda Stations.
I moved this matter on the Adjournment having regard to the fact that this small Garda station in my constituency is a very important one. The old station is in a state of disrepair and local gardaí are in temporary accommodation which is inappropriate and unsuitable in this era of modern policing. Will the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform outline the current plans and the proposals of his Department for Dunmanway Garda station? In light of the current temporary accommodation being used by gardaí, is it the Department's intention to provide a new Garda station on a greenfield site or to carry out major refurbishment works on the old station? Will the Minister outline the date on which such works are likely to commence, the nature of the works to be executed and any other relevant details?
The position in Dunmanway is untenable and has been so for almost 15 years. Since being elected to Seanad Éireann in August 1997 I have actively pursued this issue. In recent years gardaí were obliged to vacate the old station which is in a state of disrepair. It is unsuitable for human occupation and is particularly inappropriate for occupation by the Garda Síochána. This situation cannot be allowed to pertain. The fact that gardaí had to move to temporary accommodation is not appropriate in the 21st century.
The Minister is aware that a local action group has been working on this issue and rightly so. Its members have raised their voices and campaigned strongly for their Garda station. The Garda Representative Association has publicly supported the provision of a new or refurbished station at Dunmanway. Many local politicians and councillors have also campaigned for years on this matter and the people of Dunmanway deserve much better.
I am aware of the Minister's attitude to this issue and laud him for it, but the morale of the force in Dunmanway is at a low ebb because of the circumstances and the venue in which they are being forced to uphold law and order in Dunmanway and its environs. If the morale of gardaí is low in a town, it affects the local community very badly.
I implore the Minister to take action on this issue. I have been relatively silent on it and had no great desire to stay in the House late on a Thursday to move a motion on the Adjournment having left west Cork last Tuesday at 4.30 a.m. However, this situation needs to be resolved. I am aware there were legal difficulties surrounding the refurbishment of the old Garda station. I am also aware that the Minister's predecessor, Deputy O'Donoghue, announced that funding would be provided to carry out the refurbishment. I am further aware that since then there has been a triangle of passing the ball from one body to the other — from the OPW to the Office of the Attorney General and to the office of a solicitor. The issue to be resolved relates to access to the rear of the old premises. Whatever the issues, something must be done as a matter of urgency for the gardaí in Dunmanway and the people of the town and surrounding areas. The current situation cannot be allowed to continue. We are approaching the end of 2005 and I hope the Minister will have some positive news for me in his reply.
I am grateful to Deputy O'Donovan for raising this matter and I do not say that out of politeness. On a recent visit to his constituency, where I was opening the new Garda station at Bantry, Deputy O'Donovan asked me, before I set out on my journey, if I would be in a position to go to Dunmanway to see what the situation was for myself. On the way to the opening of the Bantry Garda station, I stopped in Dunmanway and made contact with the local gardaí in the temporary station. They showed me the old station, which has been abandoned for some time, and its surroundings. I was dismayed by what I saw. I saw a very derelict building with ivy growing through its roof and a massive nettle garden at the back. Decay was everywhere. I was told that the project for refurbishment had been in a state of paralysis for many years. I was also informed that the alternative of a greenfield site for a new station was being explored.
Having viewed the station, gone to Bantry, performed the opening ceremony, met the resident's group referred to by Deputy O'Donovan, met the Deputy himself and discussed the matter, I returned to Dublin and made inquiries as to the situation with Dunmanway Garda station. As the Deputy said, the issue was that the process of refurbishment of the station had become stalled in the triangle that he described. The problem with refurbishing the station on its existing site was that rear access was required and there was a difficulty in establishing title to land at the rear of the station. These are the kinds of problems which frequently produce paralysis in public affairs. The fact there is a problem means that everybody stops progressing the issue. The problem goes on a merry-go-round, so to speak, whereby people stare at it but nothing is done.
I am grateful to Deputy O'Donovan for drawing this matter to my attention because, if I had not been in the neck of the woods on the day in question and had not been asked by him to see the station, I would not have been aware of all the facts. I am pleased to tell him now that the question of making good title to the access route to the rear of the station has been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Therefore, the legal impediment to getting on with the project has been dealt with.
The next stage is that the access must be purchased, which will not be a major problem. The refurbishment will commence when this happens. I cannot put an exact date on it but I will make it a priority that the plans for the refurbishment of the Garda station are put in hand and that the present situation, which is unacceptable, will be addressed. I accept the point that gardaí who are asked to operate out of temporary premises are entitled to see some light at the end of the tunnel and, if not, it will affect their morale. It is bound to affect the morale of a station party which is trying to serve its local community. It is all the more reason this matter should be dealt with.
The Garda Síochána has 703 stations in Ireland, in addition to other complexes such as Templemore, Garda Headquarters and many other facilities. I want to make it clear, because we sometimes hear about insufficient investment in the Garda Síochána, that the Garda budget has never been larger. A sum of €1.1 billion goes through my Department to it, while the Office of Public Works in a separate Vote has plans to invest more than €112 million in Garda station projects from the beginning of 2005 to the end of 2007, which is a significant sum of money by any standards.
I propose to introduce change in the capacity of the State services to deal with these problems in a timely fashion. This triangular relationship between the Office of Public Works, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the housing section of the Garda Síochána, which in some instances becomes a quadrilateral involving the Chief State Solicitor and other agencies, is not working as well as it should. I want to enhance that process to ensure that projects are well managed in an energetic way.
I am grateful to the Deputy for raising the issue. I convey to his constituents and the station party in Dunmanway that I regard this a priority and will make early progress in this regard. I regret that the project was stalled for so long.
On a brighter note, it was a pleasure to visit Bantry and to open the magnificent new headquarters in the company of Deputy O'Donovan and others. I invite anyone who wants to see good quality Garda accommodation to visit the building which is a model for the rest of the country.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 2 November 2005.