Adjournment Debate.

Asylum Support Services.

Mr. Curran

I welcome the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment. It concerns the conversion in Clondalkin village of what was an hotel to an accommodation facility for asylum seekers. In recent days, concerns have been raised over the fact that this hotel was converted without the knowledge of the local authority, councillors or Members of this House who represent the area. A silent deal seems to have been done without due regard to the local community. I have mentioned the matter to the Minister who indicated to me that details of the arrangement were unknown to him in advance. The deal has effectively converted an 80-room hotel in Clondalkin village into accommodation for up to 250 asylum seekers.

While I fully understand and appreciate that such accommodation is necessary, in this particular instance the location is most inappropriate. It is inappropriate to try to locate 60 to 80 families in a hotel with no balconies, not an inch of green space and in an environment where all the local schools are short of capacity and have waiting lists for pupils. This year, one of the schools in Clondalkin village had to arrange for additional capacity in a third classroom.

The asylum hostel, as it is referred to locally, has come into being without anybody in the community having been contacted or consulted. The long-term needs of asylum seekers in the hostel have not been considered and neither have the needs of the community. There is a strong sense of disappointment that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which is ultimately responsible, has not become engaged in the matter in any sense. Ultimately, it will be a matter for the local authority and probably An Bord Pleanála to determine if the significant change in use from a hotel to a long-term residential facility requires planning permission. Although the change was significant, there has been no consultation with the local community.

I have a number of questions for the Minister of State. Can he postpone any further expansion of the facility until the community, the local authority and local representatives, including myself, are consulted about future developments? Will discussions be entered into with the local authority to see if planning permission is required for such a change of use? Will discussions be held with the Department of Education and Science to determine what will be the requirements, if any, of those residing in this asylum facility? Will the Minister of State determine whether this is an appropriate facility?

The facility does not have a single balcony or open area. When one walks out the back door of the hostel one is in a builders' providers yard on a main road, which seems most inappropriate. I have noticed that colleagues who might be election candidates for some of the Opposition parties have raised fears about the facility. I agree with some of their concerns. It would be more appropriate to locate such a facility elsewhere because its current location will be of no benefit to asylum seekers or the local community. It should be abandoned.

It is most frustrating that neither I nor other local representatives, including the Minister for Health and Children, were informed of this project in advance. It was up and running before we knew about it. When representatives from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform attend the Committee of Public Accounts tomorrow to discuss certain other sites which have been acquired, they will refer to the Department's openness. However, there was no openness in this instance and absolutely no consultation or advance notice was given of the impact on the community. We are most disappointed but I believe the Minister was personally unaware of the decision because I meet him regularly and, if he had known the facts, he would have revealed them to me.

I urge the Minister to halt further work on this project until we have engaged in meaningful negotiations, which will be necessary if the hostel is to become part of our community. In the interests of the community and the possible future residents of the institution, it cannot just be thrown into Clondalkin.

Mr. C. Lenihan

I appreciate Deputy Curran's decision to raise this matter on behalf of his constituents in Clondalkin. The reception and integration agency, RIA, is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers and is obliged to provide sufficient accommodation at all times to cater for the needs of persons who apply to the State for recognition as refugees under the 1951 Geneva Convention. The service provided by the RIA is demand driven and must be capable of expanding and contracting in line with the numbers arriving into the State. The task of providing accommodation presents considerable challenges to the RIA, which must continuously and actively manage its accommodation portfolio in regard to overall numbers, geographic location and value for money. Changes in asylum policy can also place new demands on the geographical spread of accommodation.

The RIA's portfolio currently consists of 55 centres accommodating 5,224 persons throughout the State. The agency provides accommodation to asylum seekers primarily by way of direct provision, that is on a full board basis, as per a Government decision on this matter. A small amount of self-catering accommodation is available and prioritised for persons with medical needs. The current accommodation portfolio is made up of seven State owned direct provision centres, 41 commercially owned direct provision centres and nine commercially owned self-catering centres. Under the commercial arrangements, the RIA does not acquire the property in the sense of purchasing it but contracts the properties for a fixed period in order to provide accommodation and board for asylum seekers at fixed prices.

I reiterate that the RIA operates within a continuously changing dynamic and decisions on accommodation are made on the basis of the needs and requirements facing the agency at any time. The agency operates with a view to achieving the best value for money for the Department and the State. The Deputy should appreciate that demand driven organisations such as the RIA have to make decisions in real time and on the basis of available information. A delicate balance has to be struck between long-term plans and budgetary responsibilities. As part of this active portfolio management process and under responsibilities laid on all public bodies by the national public procurement framework, the RIA advertised in the national press on 10 July 2006 for expressions of interest from persons with regard to providing accommodation and ancillary services for asylum seekers. It was in this context that an offer of accommodation in Clondalkin was made to the agency. The Tánaiste also pointed out that the property in question was assessed by the RIA as suitable and that an arrangement was entered into without reference to him.

In this instance, the urgent need for a new facility in Dublin, coupled with the commercial sensitivities surrounding the acquisition of the property prevented the RIA from engaging in any advance consultation process with local service providers. As soon as it was possible to do so the RIA contacted, and is currently liaising with, relevant Departments and agencies to overcome any initial difficulties in this regard. Discussions have opened with the relevant support groups and service providers and will intensify over the coming weeks.

As regards the running of the centres, this is largely done through partnership initiatives with the commercial sector through fixed term contracts for the provision of accommodation and ancillary services. These contracts include all day-to-day requirements, including full-board accommodation, heating, lighting, toiletries, laundry, housekeeping, cleaning materials and security. Such a contract applies to the new centre at Clondalkin. The Deputy will be aware that asylum seekers access many State services on exactly the same basis as the indigenous population.

The Tánaiste would be concerned if the opening of this centre has generated fears and concerns within the local community. This centre will accommodate some 65 families who have sought the protection of the State. The Deputy can be assured that the RIA will work with all the stakeholders to address any fears that may arise. Furthermore, it should be noted that the Tánaiste's constituency contains five accommodation centres for asylum seekers operating under the aegis of the RIA which accommodate some 320 persons. There is no question, therefore, of Clondalkin or any other area being expected to shoulder a disproportionate burden in terms of the State meeting its obligations to asylum seekers.

I note the Deputy's request for a postponement of the expansion so that the local authority and the Department of Education and Science can be consulted. I will not make a final judgment on the appropriateness of this facility and Deputy Curran will be aware that the Tánaiste is open to any issues the Deputy wishes to raise. I am sure the RIA, along with all State agencies, will be fully compliant with their obligations to the local authority. If an issue arises with regard to planning permission for change of use, I am sure the agency will take the appropriate action.

Sugar Beet Industry.

Mr. M. Moynihan

In the short time available, I wish to raise the refusal of Greencore to honour the Labour Court's recommendation on paying the correct redundancy settlement to the former workers of Irish Sugar. Greencore's refusal is one of the most despicable acts to have been committed by a multinational company. It is fundamental to the partnership agreements which have served this country well for the past 20 years that Labour Court recommendations are honoured. If workers are to sign up to future partnerships, the State must do all it can to ensure Greencore honours its agreement.

The fourth clarification from the Labour Court on 17 October clearly states that the basis for payment of redundancy was agreed by the former workers of Irish Sugar. Greencore issued a statement alleging the former workers would be paid on the double but that is absolute nonsense. Former Irish Sugar workers have always said they would have accepted an adverse decision by the Labour Court, so it behoves all Members to ensure Greencore pays the recommended redundancy settlement. Greencore is taking the State to court over the EU restructuring package but not one cent of this should be paid to the company unless it honours the Labour Court recommendations regarding its former workers. These workers have gone to considerable efforts to build up the company, so they deserve recompense.

Mr. Ferris

In its decision, the Labour Court expressed its disappointment that the company was unable to accept its invitation to enter a further meeting in a final attempt to resolve the impasse. That statement was made in response to clarifications which were sought by the workers. I find it almost incomprehensible that Greencore could refuse to comply with a Labour Court decision when it has the Minister for Agriculture and Food as its "golden share" director. How can the Government have any credibility if it refuses to compel Greencore to deliver on what is expected and what is a reasonable Labour Court decision?

Today in Portlaoise, Pat Guilfoyle of the TEEU and Gerry McCormack of SIPTU met Joe Walsh from Greencore and Seán Brady from Irish Sugar in an attempt to resolve the issue. Was the Minister aware of the meeting? Is she aware that as a result of that meeting the two gentlemen from Greencore and Irish Sugar told the workers' representatives that they are not prepared to honour the Labour Court ruling? They also said it was the same decision as delivered on 29 July to which the Minister was party, which is that the workers will not get their full entitlements. Where does the Minister stand on the matter? Is she prepared to exercise her rights as the holder of the golden share to pressurise Greencore to give in to the adjudication of the Labour Court. We need this clarification.

At present, 160 workers are out of work and living on social welfare assistance. However, Greencore has assumed a public asset built for the workers, farmers and construction workers in the company in both Carlow and Mallow. We had a vibrant industry that sustained rural Ireland for more than 80 years with plants in Thurles, Tuam, Carlow and Mallow. This industry has been sold off by a multinational for its own profit and benefit. The Minister for Agriculture and Food holds the golden share for the sole purpose of protecting the rights of the workers, producers and contractors. Where does the Minister stand? I want to know, as do the workers and producers who demand an answer and justice. That justice can only come about when everybody gets his and her rightful entitlements. Any company that ignores the Labour Court is a disgrace.

Mr. Sherlock

The question relates to the measures the Government plans to take to ensure that Greencore workers' rights to redundancy terms based on full unadjusted salary applicable at the date of redundancy plus 20% as provided in the agreement between the company and the union are upheld. Greencore sent a letter to the Labour Court stating it was not in a position to come back to the court. On 17 October the court expressed disappointment that the company was unable to accept the invitation to attend a further meeting in a final attempt to resolve the impasse.

As mentioned by the other speakers, the court also stated that for the avoidance of doubt it wished to state that it was intended in the recommendations that the staff on annualised salaries should have their ex gratia lump sum calculated by reference to their full unadjusted salary applicable at the date of redundancy plus 20% as provided in the agreement between the company and the union.

I have received a copy of a document issued by the Minister, Deputy Coughlan, following her agreement allow sugar production to cease. The document clearly referred to compensation for redundancy payments in line with recommendations of the Labour Court. If the Minister stated that redundancy would be paid in accordance with the Labour Court recommendation, she has an obligation in that regard.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Mr. Killeen)

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter.

In March 2006, Greencore Group plc announced its intention to cease sugar production in Ireland completely. The announcement followed an agreement on 24 November 2005 by EU Agriculture Ministers on a reform plan for the sugar industry involving cuts in the support price of sugar by 36% over four years. The company duly closed the remaining factory at Mallow in May 2006, with 324 redundancies, and applied for EU restructuring aid in July.

The agreement on reform of the EU sugar regime reached by the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in November 2005 provided for a scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry. Under the scheme, aid is provided for three groups: the processor, beet growers and machinery contractors. For Ireland, the aid available under the scheme is approximately €145 million. Drawing down of the restructuring aid is conditional on the submission by the processor of an aid application to the Minister for Agriculture and Food, including a detailed restructuring plan for the industry. The restructuring plan includes, among other matters, "a social plan detailing the actions planned in particular with respect to retraining, redeployment and early retirement of the workforce concerned".

The Government at its meeting on 12 July 2006 made certain decisions on the implementation of the restructuring aid. The Government decided on the amount to be reserved for growers and contractors and provided an illustrative breakdown of the potential allocation of the aid to be followed by Greencore in preparing its restructuring plan, including a figure of €28.4 million for employee redundancy payments. This figure as well as others in the Government decision was based on information supplied previously by Greencore. These decisions, which were published by way of press release by the Minister for Agriculture and Food on the same day, are now the subject of judicial review proceedings instituted by Greencore.

Greencore duly submitted an aid application in July 2006 committing to dismantle the Mallow factory fully. The application stated that with regard to redundancy payments it was honouring the Labour Court recommendation. The application was approved subject to the outcome of judicial review proceedings instituted by Greencore.

The company and the trade unions entered negotiations regarding the redundancy package. However, agreement was not reached on a number of issues and these were referred to the Labour Court. On 26 April 2006, the Labour Court made a recommendation regarding the redundancy terms for Irish Sugar workers at the Mallow plant. The recommendation provided that redundancy should be five weeks' pay per year of service, where a week's pay would be defined as actual finishing salary, excluding overtime, plus statutory redundancy entitlement, plus a bonus payment for an orderly wind-down. The unions were not satisfied with the method for calculating finishing salary used by the company. The court issued two clarifications in May, which failed to achieve a resolution to the dispute.

The Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 to 2003 oblige employers to pay redundant employees what is known as "statutory redundancy entitlements". The amount payable is related to the employee's length of service and his or her gross weekly earnings. The entitlement is calculated on the basis of two weeks' pay for every year of service, plus a bonus week, subject to a maximum wage ceiling of €600 per week. Periods of lay-off or sickness of more than six months are not included in the calculation in respect of the last three years of employment.

Employers who pay their workers their statutory redundancy entitlement and give them proper notice of being made redundant — at least two weeks — are entitled to a 60% rebate from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, financed by the social insurance fund. In cases where an employer fails to make statutory redundancy payments, the Department steps in and pays the full amount directly to the employees from the social insurance fund, and then seeks recovery of the amount paid from the employer.

I am assured that all former workers at the Mallow factory have received their statutory redundancy entitlements. I understand a significant number of former workers have accepted the company's redundancy offer and have received payment from the company. The remaining workers are disputing the company's non-statutory offer. The trade unions representing workers who have not accepted the redundancy terms on offer, SIPTU and TEEU, balloted their members on industrial action.

Industrial action was scheduled to begin on 4 October 2006, but was suspended following a request from the Labour Court for the parties to return to the court for further clarification of its recommendation. The trade unions indicated that they would attend the court, but the company declined the offer. I very much regret the decision taken by the company in this regard.

The Labour Court issued a third clarification of its recommendation on 17 October 2006. The content of this clarification is confidential to the parties and has not been published by the court. The company has indicated it is not prepared to alter its offer. Similarly, the trade unions have not changed their position and are not prepared to accept the company's existing offer.

The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, has met representatives of both the trade unions and the company and urged them to resolve their differences and to avail of the dispute settling machinery of the State, as necessary. I have also met union representatives to discuss this matter. The national implementation body has worked with the parties concerned to seek to identify an agreed procedure to resolve the issue in dispute. Ireland's system of industrial relations is essentially voluntary in nature and responsibility for the resolution of industrial disputes is a matter for the parties involved. The system of industrial relations in Ireland is designed to help and support parties in their efforts to resolve their differences rather than imposing a solution on the parties to an industrial dispute.

Where the Labour Court operates as an industrial relations tribunal in trade disputes, its recommendations are not enforceable. In such cases, the court hears both sides and then issues a recommendation setting out its opinion on the dispute and the terms on which it considers the dispute should be settled. While these recommendations are not binding on the parties concerned, the parties are expected to give serious consideration to the court's recommendation. As the Labour Court is a court of last resort in the industrial relations process, it is expected that the parties come to the process in good faith and are consequently prepared to accept the outcome, namely, the Labour Court's recommendation.

While responsibility for the settlement of a dispute ultimately rests with the parties themselves, I urge the company to reconsider its decision not to attend the Labour Court for talks. The court remains available to the parties to advance a resolution to the dispute. The experience and expertise of the Labour Court offer the best avenue for resolving the issue under dispute.

Motor Taxation.

Mr. O’Dowd

This is a very important matter and I thank the Office of the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to debate it.

Last year it was estimated that one in ten motorists were guilty of motor tax evasion. That is many people and results in a lot of money being lost to the Exchequer. The Department estimates that outstanding motor tax in October of last year amounted to €40 million, which is a very significant sum. The Minister promised at the time that he would effect immediate and urgent anti-evasion measures, but we see no sign of these. In March 2005, in a debate in the Dáil, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said he would push for the introduction of technology to detect motor tax dodgers automatically, but I see no sign of that either.

Let me outline some facts. The Garda's annual report for 2005 states proceedings were commenced against 34,000 people under road traffic legislation for not paying road tax, failing to display tax discs and other tax registration offences. The 2001 survey entitled Motor Tax, Motor Insurance and NCT Compliance, which was made available to the Minister, stated that, of moving vehicles stopped over a given period, 15% had no tax discs displayed; of HGVs stopped, 33% had no motor tax — I could not believe this; and of motor cycles, 26% did not display a current tax disc. The figures pertaining to vans and cars were 18% and 14%, respectively.

This is a very serious issue which requires immediate resolution. The Minister, Deputy Roche, referred on his website to the raising of this matter in the Dáil tonight. Although I acknowledge the presence of the Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, I am sorry the Minister is not present. He should answer in the Dáil for not honouring the promises he made and for refusing to collect taxes.

I have a solution, which is used in the United Kingdom, where on renewal of one's tax disc, a notice is sent automatically. In the United Kingdom one is told that if one does not renew the disc within the specified period, one will be issued immediately with a fine in excess of €100.

We do not want the Garda to stop all the cars throughout the country because that is not reasonable, nor do we want to waste our time. Rather, we want new digital technology to read number-plates of vehicles that move at speed and check whether their owners pay their tax and insurance.

Ultimately the Minister must stop this scandal. Our non-national roads, country roads, are underfunded and falling apart. An extra €50 million per year is required to make them safe. In the budget last year, only €31 million was allocated for this purpose instead of the €50 million needed. This is where the Minister can bridge the gap, by obtaining the money. Everybody should share the pain of improving our roads and no motorists should be on the road unless they pay tax — it is as simple as that. The Minister has failed in his duty in this regard.

It is desirable to have an automatic fine in cases where one does not renew one's tax disc, provided the car is not sold or scrapped because it is at the end of its life. We need action from the Government. It is reneging on its promise to run the country properly and provide money for roads. The outstanding sum of €40 million is almost equal to the sum wasted on electronic voting machines, therefore, the Government cannot be taken seriously. It is not doing its job in regard to this matter.

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

I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The raising of this issue provides an opportunity to outline to the House the initiatives which have been introduced to combat motor tax evasion. The administration of the motor tax service has been improved substantially in recent years with the implementation of the national vehicle and driver computer system, NVDF, which facilitates real-time transaction processing by all the motor tax outlets throughout the country. Data from the NVDF are supplied to the Garda Síochána for motor tax enforcement purposes.

The NVDF has also facilitated the introduction of customer-focused initiatives such as on-line motor tax renewal and the taxing of new vehicles for the first time over the Internet. This initiative has been received very favourably by the motoring public. The statistics show that over 30% of all motorists eligible to do so pay their motor tax on-line, with a 50% take-up in Dublin. The taxation system is now more efficient and accessible and local motor tax offices can effect a faster turnaround of tax applications submitted to them.

In the year to the end of September 2006, motor tax receipts show a 10% increase as against the same period in 2005. As this 10% is significantly greater than the increase in the national vehicle fleet, which amounts to 6%, and bearing in mind that there was no increase in motor tax rates for the period in question, it suggests a very positive performance in terms of motor tax compliance. This is very much influenced by high profile Garda enforcement, particularly in recent times through the operation of the traffic corps in various road traffic and safety initiatives. The increased levels of enforcement are also reflected in the increased levels of payment of motor tax arrears. In the year to the end of September 2006 almost €19 million was collected, representing an increase of almost 11% over the same period in 2005.

The last survey on motor tax compliance dating from 2001, as mentioned by Deputy O'Dowd, estimated a persistent evasion level of 4.6%, that is, the percentage of vehicles never taxed. An evasion level of 4.6% equates to a revenue loss of €40 million in current terms. However, as I have indicated, we feel the current position is significantly better.

Some measures that have been introduced or are in the pipeline contribute in themselves to enforcement of motor tax obligations. For instance, the Garda may impound vehicles in respect of which motor tax has not been paid. The recent Road Traffic Act reduced the period of non-payment from three to two continuous months. Other enforcement initiatives are being developed by us in consultation with the Garda.

Follow-up action by the Department in conjunction with local motor tax offices has taken place in regard to under-declarations of weight for heavy goods vehicles, in particular articulated tractor units and their drawing components. The NVDF analysis indicates that an additional €1.1 million in motor tax was collected in the past year and this should be realised for each future year. It is proposed to issue reminder tax notices and follow up owners of new vehicles which remain untaxed after they have been registered with the Revenue Commissioners.

To facilitate earlier taxation following the change of ownership of vehicles, we are introducing a system whereby approved motor dealers may notify ownership changes in respect of vehicles purchased and sold by them over the Internet. This e-government project is in progress and will be operational in July or August 2007.

Arrangements have been made to issue motor tax renewal and reminder notices earlier to facilitate earlier taxing, and to reduce the period of "grace" whereby motor tax renewal applications are tolerated for up to a month after the disc expires.

We are also taking action to reduce the incidence of "non-use" declarations in support of a period where motor tax has not been paid, commonly referred to as "gapping".

I am grateful for this opportunity to inform the House about the manner in which we are tackling motor tax evasion and the evidence of success we are already achieving in this important area.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 26 October 2006.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 25 Oct 2006