Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 1 Jun 2006

Vol. 620 No. 6

Adjournment Debate.

Hospital Services.

Mr. McGinley

I welcome the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I regret that the Tánaiste has left, but she has spent much time in the House today. On Monday, she visited Letterkenny General Hospital to become familiar with general medical services in the county, particularly at the hospital, including the lack of adequate cancer services in the north west.

It would be an understatement to say that matters in Letterkenny General Hospital took a turn for the worse this morning. As they indicated a number of months ago, consultants are refusing to take on new breast cancer patients. This is an unprecedented step and shows the frustration of hospital staff. It is designed as a final wake up call about the urgency of addressing the situation. The consultants have been calling for the appointment of a permanent breast surgeon at the hospital and, now that their 1 June deadline for a response has not been met by the Department of Health and Children, they will not treat new patients referred from this morning. It is deeply regrettable that in the wake of the Tánaiste's visit, no progress was made by her Department in seeking to avert this action.

This is yet another blow to the provision of cancer services in County Donegal, which are already diminished by the absence of radiotherapy services and the BreastCheck programme. Government inaction has now led to the inferior cancer services available to the people of County Donegal and the whole north west being reduced even further.

We have become immune to the vague responses of the Tánaiste, her Department and the Health Service Executive. The delay in rolling out BreastCheck to the north west is not acceptable and the suggestion that they should travel to Belfast for radiotherapy is inadequate for Donegal patients. Tragically, the absence of radiotherapy services closer to home has led to many women enduring radical and traumatic surgery instead of the arduous journey for treatment. Many more women will do so in the future and, unfortunately, many women and men could lose their battle with cancer if the Government continues to fail the people of the area, in particular the people of Donegal.

The Donegal Action on Cancer Care group is spearheading a countywide campaign to improve cancer services in the area. A fortnight ago, a march and a meeting were organised in Letterkenny, which attracted more than 10,000 people, the silent majority as it were expressing their dissatisfaction with the inadequacy of cancer services in the county.

Donegal Action on Cancer Care has put forward a five point programme for Donegal designed to improve cancer services and medical services in general. The first point in that programme is the immediate appointment of a permanent breast surgeon in Letterkenny General Hospital, the absence of which has brought about today's crisis. The second point relates to the provision of a satellite unit for a radiation unit for the north west. It is amazing that when the radiation strategy was laid out several years ago, there was not even one centre north of the Dublin-Galway line. We were told to depend on Belfast, which has not yet come to fruition and is not the answer to our problem. On breast screening, it calls for urgent remedial action to be taken to reduce the backlog of women waiting for mammograms in the current absence of roll-out of BreastCheck in the north west. As a matter of urgency there must be funding designated for patients and their families who must travel for treatment. All Donegal patients who require radium treatment must travel to Dublin. On Tuesday I spent two hours in St. Luke's in Dublin and there were at least 12 Donegal patients there away from their families. I am not denigrating the accommodation or care but it is important that those undergoing cancer treatment are in the bosom of their families. If this was available in the north west, they could go home to the families every week.

This is not the first time I have raised this and I have raised it again today because of what has happened this morning. I appeal to the Minister of State, who has replied to this before, to give the people of Donegal some hope, particularly the 70 women in the county who are diagnosed with breast cancer every year. From now on, no new patients will be accepted in Letterkenny and alternative arrangements must be put in place.

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

I welcome the opportunity to address the issues raised by the Deputy and to set out the current position with cancer services in Letterkenny General Hospital.

In a public statement made earlier this week, when the Tánaiste visited the Donegal area, she said everyone in this country, regardless of where they live, should have access to the best possible health services. This is especially so for cancer services. The most important thing for patients is getting the best treatment. Outcomes for patients are what drive our policy and investment in cancer care. I am determined that everyone diagnosed with cancer will get top quality treatment, as near to home as possible. The Tánaiste and I remain confident the HSE can achieve these objectives.

The Deputy has raised the appointment of a permanent breast surgeon at Letterkenny General Hospital. A stand alone breast service at Letterkenny General Hospital is not an option as it does not, according to recognised cancer experts, have a large enough volume of new patients with breast cancer to achieve the high quality of services that the women of the area are entitled to receive. The preferred option of the HSE is for a true partnership to be developed between Altnagelvin Hospital in Derry and Letterkenny General Hospital. There are already strong links between these two hospitals. Altnagelvin Hospital is wholly committed to developing a workable solution with Letterkenny General Hospital.

The director of the national hospitals office and the network manager for the HSE western area are to meet with the respective management and clinical teams next week to seek to progress a partnership arrangement that can best develop breast care in the region. It is understood the model of care being sought will include combined multidisciplinary team meetings to discuss patients in both jurisdictions. Decisions on each patient will be examined collectively involving the appropriate treatment and follow up. The HSE advises it will also explore the option of a similar model with University College Hospital Galway.

The medical team at Letterkenny General Hospital will continue to attend to breast cancer patients referred to them before today and awaiting their first appointment. However, medical consultants at Letterkenny General Hospital are refusing, as of today, to accept any new referrals of breast cancer cases. Discussions at hospital level have taken place to seek a deferral of this action. Last Friday, the director of the national hospitals office wrote to the chairman of the medical board at the hospital advising that the HSE is actively pursuing a resolution of the issue of how best to provide breast cancer care to the population of Donegal. The director gave a commitment that the matter will be drawn to a definitive conclusion before the end of June, just over four weeks from today.

The Tánaiste has urged the HSE management to complete discussions on the future organisation of breast services by this date. The director also asked that any proposition to cease existing services be withdrawn in the interests of assuring best patient care. I understand that medical consultants refused to rescind their decision. The HSE, in the interests of women who will be diagnosed with breast cancer has made alternative arrangements.

Letterkenny General Hospital has advised general practitioners in Donegal that urgent new referrals of breast cancer patients should be referred to Sligo General Hospital or University Hospital Galway. Arrangements have been made with these hospitals. There is a tradition of patient referral to these hospitals.

General practitioners have also been advised that they may wish to refer patients to other hospitals, if appropriate. This clarity is essential to ensure there continues to be a service in place for women with breast cancer in Donegal.

The action of a small number of medical consultants is most regrettable, especially as the HSE is making significant efforts to resolve the issue in the best interest of women with breast cancer. I am asking that the consultants involved reconsider their decision and participate fully in the discussions next week. These discussions should take place in a positive environment and not against the backdrop of a refusal to continue to provide services to vulnerable patients.

In the coming years, almost €50 million will be invested in health facilities in Donegal, with almost €28 million being spent on additional beds and a new accident and emergency department at the hospital. This Government has quadrupled the budget of Letterkenny General Hospital since 1997, enabling the appointment of more than 550 additional staff. This is a clear expression of our confidence in the health services in Donegal and we will spend more to make the services even better in the coming years.

Inquest Hearing.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I thank the Office of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to address this very important matter. It concerns the ongoing tragedy for the parents, Brian and Rosemary, and the brothers, sisters and family of the late Frances Sheridan. It also has implications for the future conduct of inquests and highlights the need to bring forward the promised coroners' Bill.

There is an immediate need for the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, to explain the State's attitude to the second inquest into the death of Frances Sheridan and the total contradiction between the position of the Attorney General on one hand and on the other the Health Service Executive and the State Claims Agency.

Frances Sheridan died in 2004 following her discharge from Cavan General Hospital. At her first inquest last year evidence showed that the full recorded facts of her condition, including an earlier appendix operation, were not known to those who attended her in Cavan General Hospital before her discharge and subsequent death.

At last year's inquest the coroner directed the jury to return a verdict of death by misadventure but they returned a verdict of death by natural causes. This caused consternation to the grieving Sheridan family and raised profound questions which have yet to be answered.

The Attorney General ordered a second inquest and this decision was warmly welcomed by the Sheridan family. They look forward to the full facts emerging at the second inquest.

Then, like a bolt from the blue this week, the Health Service Executive and the State Claims Agency have tried to prevent the second inquest from going ahead by challenging the position of the Cavan coroner, Dr. Mary Flanagan. They have argued that she should not preside at the second inquest, having already presided at the first. This is despite the fact the Attorney General' s direction to hold a second inquest was to the Cavan coroner, Mary Flanagan, herself.

The coroner was presented on Monday with a threat from the HSE and the State Claims Agency that they would take High Court action on Tuesday unless she voluntarily stood aside. It seems this threat was not carried out but a solicitor for the HSE and the State Claims Agency again submitted in the Coroner's Court on Wednesday that she should stand aside. This is quite extraordinary. Is there a precedent for this demand? Is it not the norm that where a second inquest is required the same coroner presides?

The HSE and the State Claims Agency are arms of the same State whose chief law officer ordered the second inquest. It is mind-boggling that they should now seek to prevent that second inquest from proceeding. Both of these agencies, as well as the Attorney General, are charged with protecting the interests of citizens. Why are they acting at cross purposes?

The grief of the Sheridan family has been compounded by the events of this week. In the words of their legal adviser: "Their grief could hardly be compounded further, but it seems the HSE has managed to do that". The Sheridan family's barrister also told the coroners court that it was inconceivable to them that the HSE should threaten a High Court injunction.

I echo the call of the Sheridan family for the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children and her Cabinet colleagues here represented by the Minister of State, Deputy O'Malley, including the Minister for Finance, Deputy Cowen, to explain themselves and order an investigation into the handling of this case.

Mr. T. O’Malley

I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. I take this opportunity to express my deep condolences to the Sheridan family on the tragic loss of their daughter, Frances. In February 2004, Frances died after being discharged from the accident and emergency department of Cavan General Hospital. Last December, an inquest was held into Frances's death, presided over by the acting coroner for County Cavan. Following the hearing of the inquest, the jury returned a verdict of death by natural causes.

In January, solicitors representing the Sheridan family wrote to the Attorney General requesting that the Attorney General direct a fresh inquest pursuant to his statutory power under the Coroners Act 1962. I understand that the acting coroner also wrote to the Office of the Attorney General with comments on this request.

In April, the Attorney General advised the acting coroner that, in his opinion, it was advisable to hold a new inquest and, accordingly, pursuant to his powers under the Coroners Act 1962, he directed that the acting coroner hold the inquest. The acting coroner advised the State Claims Agency that a new inquest was to take place and that it was proposed to hold the new inquest on 31 May 2006.

It is important to advise the House of the role of the State Claims Agency in regard to matters such as these. Under the National Treasury Management Agency (Delegation of Functions) Order 2003, the management of claims alleging clinical negligence against the Health Service Executive was delegated to the State Claims Agency. As part of the overall management of clinical negligence claims, the State Claims Agency also provides legal representation at coroners' inquests for the HSE and individual practitioners employed by the executive. On learning of the intention to hold a new inquest, the HSE's solicitors wrote to the acting coroner indicating the HSE's concern as to whether it was appropriate that she should conduct the new inquest.

At no stage was it suggested that there is or might be any actual bias on the part of the acting coroner. Rather, the concern was that there would be a reasonable apprehension, in the light of the acting coroner's previous involvement in the case, that she might be biased. It was suggested that, in the circumstances, the most appropriate course was for the acting coroner to allow the new inquest to be conducted by an alternative coroner. The acting coroner declined the suggestion and confirmed her intention to open the inquest on 31 May.

Last Monday, the acting coroner informed the Sheridan family that the inquest would not go ahead on Wednesday, 31 May but instead would hear legal submissions only. This was communicated to the HSE and the State Claims Agency last Tuesday. I am advised that neither the HSE nor the State Claims Agency sought to obstruct the inquest or make any attempt to prevent it. The HSE and the agency fully accept the Attorney General's decision to direct a fresh inquest.

Crop Losses.

Mr. Finneran

I raise this matter on the Adjournment to call on the Minister for Agriculture and Food to provide compensation to farmers in the Shannon and Suck river basin for the loss of fodder due to the severe flooding in the area in recent weeks. In particular I refer to my constituency of Roscommon-south Leitrim and the area of south Roscommon from Athlone, through the Clonown area, to Shannonbridge, on to Meelick and on the River Suck from Athleague, through the Ballyforan area, down through the Moore area to Shannon Harbour.

Given the extraordinary levels of rainfall in early May, farmers in that region who had taken their cattle to the callows in May had to withdraw them due to severe flooding. That is now causing severe hardship and a financial strain on the farmers involved, first, because of the cost of moving cattle, which must be moved by tractors, trailers and lorries, second, the fact that they had to go back on lands closed for hay and silage to be cut later in the year and, third, bagged and loose feedstuff, and in some cases hay and silage, had to be bought from merchants. It must be understood that these callows, by and large, are now useless for 2006. The picture I paint on behalf of the farmers who live in the south Roscommon area and who have suffered a great financial loss over the past four weeks is not a rosy one and it will have repercussions in terms of their income for 2006.

I ask that the Minister pay a direct fodder payment to the farmers involved. It is easy for the Teagasc offices to evaluate for the Minister the losses involved. I do not want to hear that they must go through the community welfare officer, the Department of Social and Family Affairs or the Red Cross, or that some other group will examine hardship cases. Farmers are business people and they have suffered a major loss through no fault of their own. It was an act of God. There is a responsibility on the Department of Agriculture and Food. I call also on the Department of Finance to approve moneys for the Department of Agriculture and Food to allow payments to be made to these farmers directly through the Department of Agriculture and Food.

The Teagasc offices in County Roscommon should be called in and asked to evaluate the losses and a financial package should be put together to meet those losses. Nobody is looking for a major package but losses are being experienced and in many cases they amount to several thousand euro to individual farmers. Farmers throughout the country are not making a living from their land to any great extent. Indeed, they have difficulty surviving. Most of them are surviving on the basis of a spouse working or working themselves part time.

I have had numerous representations from farmers and farmer organisations in the south Roscommon area. I am aware that representatives from the Westmeath and Offaly constituencies have had similar representations, and I presume that applies to east Galway. I am talking about a pocket of Ireland in the midlands that is concentrated from the weir at Meelick towards Athlone and the implications of that on the River Shannon and the farmers on both sides, particularly the south Roscommon area as far as I am concerned, and from Shannon Harbour to Athleague, both on the Roscommon and the east Galway side. As far as I am aware, it is only in that pocket of the country that this hardship is being experienced.

This situation is ongoing and there is nothing the farmers can do about it. The only way we can respond as a Parliament is to call on the Minister with responsibility, namely, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, to provide a financial package for these people. That should be done through the Department of Agriculture and Food, with the Department of Finance providing the necessary funds. The statutory body capable, on past experience, of doing evaluations, namely, Teagasc, must carry out those investigations as a matter of urgency in the interest of the farmers in the region.

Mr. T. O’Malley

I am replying to this Adjournment debate matter on behalf of the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, who is unable, due to another commitment, to be in the House this afternoon. The Minister has asked me to apologise for his unavoidable absence.

The River Shannon is the longest river in Ireland and one of the larger rivers in western Europe. The river drains a catchment of 14,700 sq km to the Shannon Estuary, an area of approximately one fifth of the area of Ireland. The river is characterised by relatively steep upper and lower sections and a very flat gradient through its middle reach from Lough Ree to Lough Derg. The low-lying lands surrounding the River Shannon, or the callows, especially those along the middle section, have experienced regular flooding for centuries.

The Minister of State and his officials in the Office of Public Works are aware of the current level of flooding in the Shannon callows. While winter and occasional summer flooding is a feature of the callows, severe flooding of the kind being experienced at present is not. The current exceptional flooding is due to the unusually heavy rainfall we have experienced in the month of May. It may well prove to be the highest May rainfall on record.

I understand that the farming area to which the Deputy refers lies within a special area of conservation. With regard to the question of possible compensation for the financial loss incurred by farmers as a result of flooding in this area, it is therefore primarily a matter for consideration by the Department of Agriculture and Food or the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

While it is true that the OPW was involved in recent years in overseeing a number of humanitarian aid schemes administered on the OPW's behalf by the Irish Red Cross for the relief of those who had suffered hardship as a result of severe flooding, I stress that each of these schemes was only introduced on foot of a Government decision and only in instances where the damage had been especially severe and widespread throughout the country. The schemes were humanitarian and were designed to relieve hardship. They were not compensation for losses. While some of the earlier schemes provided assistance where hardship resulted from damage to businesses and farm buildings, provision of aid in the more recent schemes was restricted to hardship resulting from damage to homes only.

The OPW no longer has any responsibility for such Government approved humanitarian aid schemes. This function has now been transferred from the OPW to the Department of Social and Family Affairs, following the recommendations of the interdepartmental flood policy review group. The Government approved the implementation of the recommendations of the flood policy review group in September 2004. One of the review group's recommendations was that:

[T]he provision of emergency assistance (Humanitarian Aid) where serious flooding has occurred to be limited to situations where damage has occurred to homes and to be administered by the community welfare services of the regional health boards, in conjunction with, as appropriate, local community and voluntary groups and non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

Responsibility for future programmes of humanitarian aid has therefore now been transferred from the OPW to the Department of Social and Family Affairs under whose aegis the community welfare services operate.

The Office of Public Works has no responsibility in the maintenance of the River Shannon. It would be open to the commissioners under the provisions of the Arterial Drainage Act 1945 and the Arterial Drainage (Amendment) Act 1995 to prepare a scheme to prevent or substantially reduce flooding in an area. The possibility of undertaking an arterial drainage scheme for the River Shannon has been considered on a number of occasions and has been ruled out on both economic and environmental grounds.

In 2003, the Commissioners of Public Works undertook a further preliminary assessment of the Shannon flood problem. This reviewed the previous reports and their conclusions in the light of the changes that had occurred in the catchment in the intervening 40 years. The review considered a variety of issues, for example, conditions in and competing uses of the river, perceived changed climate patterns, changed agricultural regulations and practices, different economic circumstances for agriculture and other industries, the higher values being placed on environmental and heritage assets and tourism opportunities.

This was to establish if any possibility existed that a more detailed study might identify viable options to alleviate the flooding problem. It recommended that a pre-feasibility study of possible flood risk management opportunities be undertaken. That study was completed in late 2004 and copies were given to the stakeholders.

Property Management Companies.

Mr. Sargent

Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabhaíl leis an Cheann Comhairle as cead a thabhairt dom an cheist thábhachtach seo a ardú. I welcome the Minister of State, although I was hoping the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, might attend. The issue I wish to raise, relating to management fees, will grow and will need serious consideration by the senior Minister.

The front page of The Irish Times today states that child care costs are rising at five times the rate of inflation according to the Central Statistics Office. The Minister of State can imagine how difficult this is in itself. On top of that, many first-time buyers are being landed with management fees. People have contacted me on this issue from practically all of the towns in Dublin North. I have no doubt this is a countrywide problem, as other Deputies to whom I have spoken will indicate.

One resident in a house states:

I am a resident at Barons Hall, Flemington, Balbriggan. I am writing to appeal to you to take action on a national level for the plight of residents like myself who are being forced to pay fees to cowboy companies. I, like all other residents who live in this area, am disgusted at the idea of paying out management fees for basic services that are not done and which should be done by the council anyway. I, like others, never found out about management fees until signing for my house. By that stage it was either sign or lose the house.

Smith Property Management, on behalf of the builders, Pat Neville Developments, are trying to extract €250 a year from householders for the most basic of services, such as cutting grass and cleaning the area, which they do not even bother doing. Other estates in Balbriggan do not pay management fees and have these basic services provided by the council. This is tantamount to discrimination.

Management companies are completely unregulated and it seems they can charge what they want and provide any type of service they think they can get away with. I am asking you to take up this case with the Department of the Environment and Fingal County Council. This is a problem which will not go away without political intervention. I am a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen and I have always paid my bills on time, but I feel so strongly about this situation I have refused to pay.

I have written to the management company and their reply was lame. The bottom line is that they should be outlawed and properly regulated for apartment owners.

That householder may well come to find that if the house is sold, he will be landed with an enormous accumulated fee. That is where the Government is favouring a type of extortion by not regulating such companies and allowing the sector to grow and get worse.

I mentioned a charge of €250, but they can vary. At a recent public meeting in Balbriggan I heard of charges of between €200 and €1,500 per year per home or apartment. This would be hiked up every year. One management company published accounts stating that €133,000 in fees were collected, of which €23,000 was spent on administration and only €6,000 on maintenance. This brazen profiteering is only happening because the Government is starving local authorities of staff and finance while failing to legislate what is in many ways corruption and extortion out of existence.

I ask the Minister of State not just to take on board legislation. That could be done quickly and we have found that out this week. It is firstly a matter of awareness. I urge the Minister of State to ensure that awareness is raised in the public mind of the possibility of management companies coming in at the point of sale of a house like wolves in sheep's clothing. In England there is a right to manage other types of documentation based on the Commonhold and Leaseholder Reform Act 2002. We do not have the type of documentation or awareness in this country because we do not have as much a tradition of living in apartments as other countries.

People are therefore being ambushed. The Government is standing idly by and I question how irresponsible that is. For example, Fingal County Council does not put too fine a tooth on the matter when it states with regard to management companies:

The current model, unregulated by a lack of any controlling primary governing legislation, is open to abuse. The most common is where a developer holds a controlling interest either by some clause in the management company structure or by controlling a significant number of properties by retaining ownership (renting, not selling them).

Under section 180 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as long as the management company is in situ, people cannot hold a plebiscite. As long as the developer holds one of the properties, the estate is allowed to continue on with a management company. Money is being demanded from people, and this is in many ways extortion. A number of recommendations have been made by Fingal County Council on primary legislation. One such recommendation states that matters that can be controlled by legislation are a prohibition on developers withholding the handing over of control for a prolonged period, and the introduction of a formula to calculate reasonable contributions to prevent the imposition of excessive management charges at the outset.

The necessary regulations are not in place and the Minister of State is standing idly by while extortion takes place. I urge him to regulate this activity and to promote awareness of the situation so that people are not ambushed into paying those charges. He should act on this without waiting for the Law Reform Commission. He should act on receipt of its report but, in the meantime, people are being drained of resources they scarcely have. If the Minister of State had to pay the charges he would do something about it.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Mr. B. O’Keeffe)

I thank the Deputy for the opportunity to address this important issue.

Many public representatives are aware of problems experienced by some apartment owners——

Mr. Sargent

And householders.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

——and it is right that we should look for equitable solutions. Because of the legal complexities affecting these issues, the Government has sought the expert assistance of the Law Reform Commission, whose report is now at an advanced stage. Resolving the various difficulties has implications for a number of legislative codes including measures relating to company law and conveyancing. The Government will consider the recommendations in the Law Reform Commission's final report, including the need for any new legislation in this area.

Mr. Sargent

Will it act in the interim?

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

Insofar as abuses of the sort referred to, involving developer-controlled companies, may exist this is likely to arise from the developer retaining some units in a development and, as a result, maintaining control of the management company which should properly transfer to the owners of apartments soon after the development is completed. The resolution of management problems should be largely in the hands of the homeowners via the management companies of which they are members. However, a source of problems at present seems to be the manner in which developers can retain effective control of management companies indefinitely. This seems to derive from the fact that standard conveyancing practice and company law provisions allow for developers' nominees on management companies to outvote owners if the developer retains a single unit in the development.

Mr. Sargent

The Minister should refer to section 118 of the Act.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

Legislative action to address this would involve conveyancing and company law, which are outside my Department's area of responsibilities. However, it would clearly be desirable to have the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission in that regard.

Property owners in multi-unit structures should also realise that there is a primary onus on them to ensure that their management companies operate effectively once control of the company has transferred to them. There can also be an information deficit in this area, which is inimical to the effective operation of management arrangements. One basic source of difficulty is the general lack of information and understanding about the need for and role of management companies, and the rights and obligations of home owners in this area. As an immediate practical step to address this information deficit, my Department is co-ordinating the provision of clear and concise general information, particularly for home buyers. This will issue very shortly.

The legal profession also has a key role in protecting home buyers from abuses. Conveyancers are to be generally complimented for the way in which they have adapted conveyancing practice to facilitate the huge growth in the development and sale of apartments. They need to be vigilant in ensuring that the rights of buyers are fully safeguarded from inappropriate obligations or excessive costs in house purchase contracts, particularly where buyers feel pressurised in the context of a rising property market. I hope the legal profession as a whole will be able to help raise the level of protection further in conjunction with the construction industry.

It is also open to the construction industry, on a voluntary basis, to take action to address some of the key sources of difficulty. They do not need to wait to be forced by legislation to take action to address some of the inadequacies and shoddy practices that have come to light. This action could involve the agreement between the industry and the legal profession of standard guidelines and documentation relating to house purchase conveyancing and contracts, based on appropriate principles. Issues that could be dealt with in this way might include the appropriateness of charges, transfer of control to unit owners, developers' responsibilities pending taking in charge by local authorities and maintenance of adequate sinking funds. My Department is exploring with the construction industry the scope for practical action in this regard pending any necessary changes to conveyancing and companies legislation in light of the LRC report.

Local authorities must also play their part and, in particular, avoid adding to complexities or uncertainty in the context of applying planning conditions relating to management arrangements. My Department is pursuing this aspect with planning authorities. However, the issue of planning conditions relating to management companies is not a totally straightforward one. The Planning Act allows the attachment of these conditions, recognising that management companies have been traditionally set up for the maintenance of apartment buildings and their attendant private grounds.

Mr. Sargent

They hold houses now.

Mr. B. O’Keeffe

It has been made plain that it is not appropriate to attach planning conditions regarding management companies in the case of traditional housing estates, with their own front and back gardens. I also consider that it is appropriate that planning authorities should take in charge the public roads, no matter what type of residential estate is in question. However, the traditional housing estate is, in many areas, being replaced by the mixed estate, which may contain apartments, duplex houses and terraced houses, with shared facilities such as car parking and gardens. High specification paving, lighting and landscaping are frequently features of such estates. Genuine questions arise as to whether it is appropriate that all these facilities be taken in charge and maintained at public expense. Many of these facilities are replacing the traditional gardens, which, in a conventional housing estate, would fall to be maintained by the residents rather than the local authority.

Depending on the circumstances, it may be appropriate in the case of these newer estates for a management company to be in place to maintain facilities on behalf of the residents. In some cases the residents of such estates may have purchased their homes on the basis that the development remain a private one and not be taken in charge by the local authority.

My Department published a booklet last December entitled: Housing Policy Framework: Building Sustainable Communities. This sets out an agenda for an integrated package of policy initiatives on matters that included supporting higher densities and compact urban settlement through design innovation in the creation of new homes, new urban spaces and new neighbourhoods. In line with this, my Department is updating the residential density guidelines. It will be appropriate to examine further the issues of taking in charge and management companies in this context.

Mr. Sargent

The Government needs to end extortion.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 2 June 2006.