Adjournment Debate.

Local Authority Rates.

Deputy Mary Alexandra White

I raise the need to review the levying of commercial rates on local community groups which have charitable status, such as Teach Mhuire in Gowran, County Kilkenny. It is a terrific community initiative supplying meals on wheels, laundry services and other supports for the elderly and disadvantaged. There has been great progress in recent years in State support to encourage community and voluntary groups, and funding for these groups has increased significantly. The new Charities Act will greatly enable charities such as Teach Mhuire to do their work.

Something must be done about the levying of rates on institutions such as Teach Mhuire, particularly voluntary groups which do such tremendous work in their community. A good example is the Gowran parish enterprise centre in my constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny. The enterprise, otherwise known as Teach Mhuire, provides vital services for older and vulnerable people in the local community, those living in rural isolation in that part of south Kilkenny and those without much family support.

The centre provides meals on wheels, a terrific laundry service, therapy, computer services and yoga. For those who are unable to cook for themselves, a car is provided to bring those people to the centre so they can have one good hot meal every day. The area serviced by this organisation is wide in terms of geographical boundaries in Kilkenny. It serves Gowran, Dungarvan, Goresbridge, Paulstown, Clara and Bennettsbridge, which amounts to a very wide and diverse geographical spread.

The centre applied for and obtained charitable status from the Revenue Commissioners, which ensures that the centre gets a tax exemption from deposit interest retention tax, capital acquisitions tax, companies capital duty and stamp duty. It also provides, through the Taxes Consolidation Act, tax relief for donations made to the centre. All of this is most welcome.

However, at local authority level the centre is now faced with a very large levy of commercial rates on their premises payable to Kilkenny County Council. In 2009, €1,726 is due to the council, which is appalling. This is a wonderful charitable enterprise doing tremendous work in the local community and it cannot afford to pay these rates. Although this may not seem like a large sum to the county council in terms of the €10.5 million in rates that it collected in 2007, it is a massive financial burden for a small community service centre which is not operating for profit and which has all the high costs necessary for companies, such as insurance, rent and employees' wages, in order to run these wide-ranging and diverse services for the local community.

The levying of rates on such organisations is financial madness. If the letter of the law must be applied, I hope that a token rate on such enterprises might be undertaken. If the State were to undertake these services, it would cost millions of euro to replicate the services run at Teach Mhuire.

I ask the Minister of State to ensure that this excellent organisation should not be penalised in such a high-handed manner. I hope those involved will be allowed to continue to roll out the service and that the rates will be removed, particularly as the organisation involved is charitable in nature. Like many affected by the recession, the employees of this organisation have taken a major pay cut. This is a vital community initiative and I hope that the rates relating to it might be removed as a gesture of goodwill and in view of the fact that it is a charitable organisation.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh)

I commend Deputy White for placing on record the valuable work done by the community initiative to which she refers. I hope my reply will be of assistance.

The Valuation Act 2001, which came into effect on 2 May 2002, provides that all buildings used or developed for any purpose including constructions affixed thereto are rateable. Under the Act, the Commissioner of Valuation is independent in the exercise of his duties and the Minister for Finance has no function in decisions in this regard.

I am advised by the Valuation Office that in general all buildings, for whatever purpose, are rateable under the provisions of the Valuation Act 2001. However, there are certain categories of buildings provided for as non-rateable under schedule 4 of the Act. Such buildings would principally include those used for public worship, education and institutions of art and science. There may be instances where enterprises which are operated on a not-for-profit basis are deemed not to be rateable if conducted in a community hall. Within the context of the legislation, a community hall means a hall or similar building, which must not be used primarily for profit or gain and which is occupied for use by the inhabitants of the locality generally for purposes that are recreational or otherwise of a social nature.

I understand that commercial retail activity is carried out at the premises in question and that it is run on a for-profit basis. The position in respect of the valuation of retail shops has not changed under valuation law since 1852. All shops which compete in the marketplace with other similar retail shops are rateable under schedule 3(1)(a) of the Valuation Act 2001. Retail shops which are run by charitable organisations in the usual course — such as Oxfam, Sue Ryder and the Society of St. Vincent de Paul — are all rateable because the charitable content is not in the shop itself.

Given that the Valuation Office adjudged that the restaurant-café run by the Gowran Community Group Limited is a commercial operation, it is considered rateable. The Valuation Act 2001 maintains the long-standing position that commercial facilities are liable for rates. It was not intended that the Valuation Act 2001 would expand or contract the valuation base. Exceptions to this key principle would be quickly followed by demands for similar treatment from providers of other useful services and products, which would be difficult, in equity, to resist. These premises are competing with other commercial premises and the effect of removing any category of rateable property from the valuation base would be to reduce local authority revenues and could also increase the rates burden on other taxpayers. The Valuation Office, in its assessment of these premises, was satisfied that the Gowran Community Group Limited did not meet the criteria for exemption from rates on either charitable or community hall grounds as defined under the Valuation Act.

Any individual ratepayer who has concerns regarding the valuation of his or her property or any part of thereof, including its rateability, may, on payment of the statutory fee of €250, apply to the Commissioner of Valuation for a revision of the valuation. If dissatisfied with the outcome, he or she may appeal to the Commissioner of Valuation in the first instance and subsequently to the independent Valuation Tribunal. There is a further right of appeal to the High Court and ultimately to the Supreme Court on a point of law. In this instance, the occupier did not avail of the statutory consultation and appeal process provided for in the Valuation Act 2001.

As matters stand, the Valuation Office, the local authority or the Minister cannot exempt the building from rates. However the ratepayers, namely the organisation in question, can examine whether the circumstances which led to the original decision have changed to such an extent that, under current legislation, a case for an exemption can be made. It may also do so if it is of the view that the position was in some way misrepresented. There are avenues of recourse but these are not within the control of the Government.

Urban Regeneration Schemes.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I thank the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Finneran, for attending the House to reply to this matter. However, it is a pity the Minister, Deputy Gormley, is not taking a more active interest in this important issue. I would like him to play some role in respect of it.

I am raising the issue of the Ballymun regeneration scheme because I am extremely concerned with regard to the slowdown that has occurred in respect of this project. The regeneration scheme has been exceptionally successful to date. This project is unique in its scale because never before has an existing town with a population of some 15,000 been replaced, on the same site, with a new town. The Ballymun regeneration scheme has posed major challenges to those charged with managing it and also the residents who have been prepared to endure massive disturbance and disruption for the sake of achieving the greater good of quality homes to replace the dilapidated and unsafe flats which are now well past their sell-by date.

To date, some 1,500 families have been rehoused and homes for a further 300 are currently under construction. My concern is for the remaining 500 families whose replacement homes are in jeopardy or completion of which will be seriously delayed as a result of the Government's failure to provide the necessary funding to maintain the regeneration scheme. Up to last year, funding was always provided to Ballymun Regeneration Limited, BRL, in arrears following payment by the company itself. In 2008, the Department notified BRL that, for the first time, the funding available would be limited. The indication was that €80 million would be provided. Some €75 million of this was receipted by December last, with the remaining €5 million receipted in January.

Due to the rolling nature of the construction programme and contractual commitments already entered into, expenditure exceeded income last year. BRL, therefore, had an opening debit balance of €31 million for 2009. The existing commitment in respect of replacement housing in 2009 is €53 million. It is a matter of the utmost concern that the Department's allocation for this year is only €45 million. When one takes into account the opening debit balance of €31 million and the €53 million already committed, one discovers that an additional €39 million will be required during this year. That is the very least amount that will be required and it will merely allow the regeneration scheme to continue to tick over. Construction on the outstanding 500 homes must also be commenced and we cannot allow any slippage in the context of maintaining the momentum of the scheme.

In February, BRL and Dublin City Council presented to the Department a funding proposal under which the regeneration scheme would be completed by 2014, two years later than promised. The arguments in favour of this proposal are indisputable. The regeneration scheme has been ongoing for ten years and it is critical that the confidence and momentum relating to it be maintained.

Some 500 families continue to live in exceptionally difficult and unsafe circumstances. Putting the remainder of the programme out to tender now would result in substantial savings in the current financial climate. It is estimated that savings of as much as 20% might be made. The massive public investment that has already been made in Ballymun must be protected. There is a real danger that that investment could be undermined through an escalation in antisocial activity because of the severe difficulty in managing and policing a stalled regeneration project. It is virtually impossible to manage large apartment blocks where many of the units lie idle, and those empty units are now subject to fairly serious antisocial activity by elements in the area. It is an extremely difficult situation to manage and we simply cannot run the risk of damage being done to existing works that have been carried out.

Furthermore, the existing business confidence in the area which was so hard to achieve and into which so much effort was put in to building could be lost if there is any further delay. An important point in the current circumstances is that the regeneration can sustain at least 300 construction jobs, which would result in welfare savings and tax of over €6 million per annum.

I am appealing to the Minister. There are six very good reasons the Ballymun regeneration programme must be rebooted and kept going. Already there has been slippage, and we know that two years have been lost because of delays with funding. It is critical that we stick to the kind of schedule and funding timeframe that has been set out for the Minister by Ballymun Regeneration Limited and Dublin City Council where the entire project can be finished by 2014. We cannot afford any more slippage in that area. The risks the Minister runs by doing that are too great, both in terms of the financial investment that has occurred but also, and more important, in terms of the hopes and aspirations of those 500 families whose dreams have been dashed because of the delays that are occurring and who, like all of the other residents in Ballymun, deserve to have decent quality living conditions.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran)

I thank Deputy Shortall for raising this important housing issue. It is nearly 11 years since the master plan for a new Ballymun was published and the regeneration process began. Since then, the Government has demonstrated strong commitment to the Ballymun Regeneration Project with over €580 million in Exchequer funding devoted to it to date.

It is worth reminding ourselves of the situation which previously existed in Ballymun and which regeneration has sought to address. In the 30 years after the Ballymun estate was constructed, no private housing had been built in the area and no private investment had been made in the town. During the 1990s there were hundreds of vacant flats in Ballymun because people simply did not want to live there. Community facilities in Ballymun either did not exist or were of poor quality.

Against this background the transformation of the Ballymun landscape has been remarkable and has improved the quality of life for many thousands of people in the area. Construction of new housing started in 2000 and since then, more than 1,000 families have moved from the flats into their new homes. At the same time, six of the landmark seven towers have been demolished. Close to half of the original 2,800 flats are either already demolished or under contract to be demolished. In addition to replacement local authority housing, more than 1,400 new private, voluntary and cooperative homes are built or in progress at this stage.

This year a provisional allocation of €45 million has been earmarked for the project. In addition, further specific funding will be identified in Dublin City Council's main social housing allocation to fund de-tenanting associated with its various regeneration projects, including Ballymun.

The regeneration of Ballymun is not just about replacement housing. Building identifiable neighbourhoods with relevant community facilities is a central commitment in the master plan. In that regard, local parks and 12 new playgrounds have been developed as well as neighbourhood centres comprising shops, apartments and community meeting rooms.

A new traditional main street has been developed comprising shops, hotels, a civic centre, a sports and leisure centre and private housing. Planning permission has been granted for a new town centre to replace the shopping centre, and we hope that will start soon. IKEA is to open on 27 July with 500 jobs, and the metro is coming to Ballymun.

Community spirit is thriving in Ballymun and the town is picking up awards for everything from Tidy Towns and Sustainable Energy awards to The Irish Times theatre accolades. The Government is very proud of the progress made to date and my Department is actively working with Ballymun Regeneration Limited and the local authorities to ensure that the regeneration project can be sustained, consolidated and completed, taking account of budgetary circumstances, with a particular focus on achieving best value for money.

The result is that Ballymun is now evolving into a vibrant mixed tenure community, moving from a cycle of dependency to a sustainable community in its own right, but there are major challenges ahead and it is for that reason that I have asked the Ballymun Regeneration Agency, in conjunction with Dublin City and Fingal County Councils, to review the strategic direction of the programme to make sure we are meeting the objectives set having regard to the more difficult economic environment in which we now find ourselves.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

What does that mean?

Deputy Michael Finneran

It is acknowledged that it will take longer to complete the regeneration, not least because there has been a slowdown in the private sector investment needed to secure the sustainability of the project.

Ballymun is an area that is being transformed through this regeneration but we must now ensure that the regeneration programme is geared to meet the new challenges we face so that all that has been gained in Ballymun to date is safeguarded for the future. At the same time, I am mindful of the conditions in which some tenants from the older accommodation have to live. As I mentioned earlier, provision is being made within the Dublin City Council housing allocation to support the transfer of regeneration tenants generally to better quality accommodation and I look forward to the council progressing this issue, in co-operation with Ballymun Regeneration Limited.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

Very disappointing.

Food Labelling.

Deputy Andrew Doyle

I will use three minutes of my time and give two minutes to my colleague, Deputy Tom Sheahan, our spokesperson on fisheries.

I am grateful to the Ceann Comhairle for accepting this Adjournment matter. It is on foot of a recent court case which saw 42 alleged breaches of the Food Safety Act brought against a well known fish company involving 22 packets of salmon which had been tested. The DNA evidence concluded that they were from farmed fish stock but on a point of law the judge ruled that she could not convict on the basis of the evidence before her. I understand the point of law was that it was not proven beyond doubt that the farmed fish had not escaped into the wild before they were caught, which is a moot point.

The temptation to mislead in this case goes to the wider issue of food labelling. Food labelling has been on the agenda here for the past 12 months, particularly on foot of the pork crisis which proved that more comprehensive food labelling is needed if we are to mitigate against such serious financial, marketing and reputational damage to the country's food industry such as we saw last year. A total of €40 per kilo is the price differential at retail level between farmed salmon versus wild salmon — €16.46 to €55.90. The temptation exists, therefore. This issue arose previously, following on from the pork crisis, regarding hampers that were being sent to America by another Irish company. It transpired that the hampers did not contain any Irish bacon.

The Food Safety Authority of Ireland has called for changes to food labelling. It has said it encounters many complaints. I know they are not usually to do with the question of wild versus farmed salmon but Ireland has a fantastic reputation for our wild salmon, hence the price of almost €60 per kilo, and anything that throws that reputation into doubt must be stopped. The FSAI stated also that there is a lack of legislation on which to base prosecution.

Agri Aware did a survey last year which indicated that fewer than one in five people in the country was happy with food labelling. A total of 80% considered that our agrifood industry, which includes our fishing industry, had a reputation worth preserving. We discussed this briefly this morning but it must be addressed. The court case findings and ruling by the judge must be analysed to see if we can address this situation to ensure it does not happen again.

Deputy Tom Sheahan

Why do we need labelling for fish products? Cork Airport is now the busiest fish port in the country, with fish being imported by plane. It is a sad state of affairs in an island nation. Irish people will buy Irish goods but there must be effective labelling, stating what the product is, if it is fresh, farmed or wild, its origin and where it was processed. In my former life as a butcher, any beef in my shop showed the date of birth of the cow, the producer, the herd number, animal number, date of slaughter and the licence number of the abattoir where it was slaughtered. We are not asking for that amount of detail for fish but the Irish consumer deserves to know what he is putting on the table. There must be information on country of origin, the product, where it was processed and who produced it.

It is projected that the pork dioxin scare will cost €180 million and a percentage of that will be paid for pork that was not Irish because it was not traceable and we cannot determine its origin. This is why effective labelling is necessary.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Tony Killeen)

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as deis a thabhairt dom freagra a thabhairt ar an ábhar tábhachtach seo. Aontaím leis an méid atá ráite ag na Teachtaí.

The issue of labelling of fisheries products is governed by statutory instrument under EU regulations. The regulations set out specific information which must be included on the label where fishery products are sold at retail level to consumers. In addition, for the purposes of traceability, this information must be included on the commercial documents for the fishery products throughout the marketing chain, such as during processing, at wholesale level and for use by mass caterers.

The labelling requirements of the regulations apply only to raw fish and aquaculture products to which no other ingredients have been added except salt, and include live fish; fresh, chilled and frozen fish; fish fillets and other fish meat, whether minced or not; dried, salted or brined fish; smoked fish, whether hot or cold smoked fish; crustaceans, except those which are both cooked and peeled; and molluscs, except when cooked. Processed products such as breaded fish fillets, crab sticks, ready-to-eat dishes or tinned fish are not covered by the regulations.

The fishery and aquaculture products listed above which are offered for retail sale to the final consumer must indicate on the label the commercial designation of the species of fish, the production method, whether farmed or caught at sea or in freshwater and the catch area. These requirements apply only to products for retail sale to the final consumer. In other words, these rules apply to products which are sold at retail level whether they are pre-packaged or sold loose over the counter.

These labelling requirements do not apply to small quantities of fishery products sold directly to consumers by either fishermen or producers provided these products do not exceed the value of €20 for each purchase.

The method of production — the means by which the fish have been obtained — must be also indicated on the product, in other words, whether they have been caught either at sea, or produced by aquaculture. The production method must be declared as follows: "caught" where the fish were caught at sea or "cultivated" or "farmed" where the fish are produced from aquaculture.

The catch area must be indicated as follows. Products caught at sea must detail the name of the area where they were caught according to Appendix VIII, such as "north-east Atlantic". This is the minimum amount of information that must be provided. However, in addition, more detailed information regarding these catch areas may be also given, for example, fish caught in the Irish Sea must declare "north-east Atlantic" but additional information such as "caught off the east coast of Ireland" may be also declared.

Farmed products must reference the member state or third country in which the product undergoes the final development stage. For example, if a fish started its life in Scotland and underwent final development in Ireland, the labelling could state "farmed Irish fish" or similar. Where the product is farmed in more than one member state or third country, the member state where the product is sold to the final consumer shall authorise which member state or third country is to be indicated.

In July 2008, in response to industry concerns arising from falling quay wall prices, rising fuel costs and a view that imports were impacting on demand in the domestic market for wild Irish caught fish, I established the Irish Seafood Market Initiative Group. This group recently reported its key recommendations. These included recommendations that the BIM quality seafood programme should be the primary approach to identifying and differentiating Irish seafood. This programme will raise consumer awareness on the range of available Irish seafood. A promotional campaign should be developed in 2009, to raise awareness across a range of available yet under-utilised and less recognised species from fisheries and aquaculture. The opportunity for regional identification and branding of Irish seafood should be developed. Seafood should be included in the draft proposal being prepared by the European Commission aimed at consolidating and upgrading food labelling legislation. BIM is actively working with the industry to endeavour to make these recommendations a reality as soon as possible.

One recent case that received some media attention was dismissed not for salmon labelling issues but because the judge felt the evidence put before her did not adequately prove that the salmon was farmed as set out in European Council Regulation 1198/2006. The FSAI and the SFPA are reviewing the case in its totality and the implications arising. I also refer to a case earlier in the same month, where the same company admitted falsely describing fish as being "caught at sea" when they were in fact farmed and declaring that particular fish were caught in the north-east Atlantic Ocean when they were in fact captured in Norway.

This shows that the present labelling legislation can provide the necessary strength to protect consumers. The importance of not misleading the consumer is a fundamental requirement of food legislation and cannot be over emphasised. The damage done to Ireland by companies trying to manipulate legislation to gain some sort of competitive advantage to the detriment of Ireland cannot and will not be condoned.

In the overall context, I favour strengthening of the current labelling EU regulations to ensure that there is more information available to the consumer. I am particularly interested in ensuring that the consumer has enough information to understand where fish have been caught. It should enable the consumer to make an informed choice and I will pursue these issues at EU level.

School Transport.

Deputy Beverley Flynn

In June 2007, Srah national school closed and amalgamated with Scoil Náisiúnta an Trian Láir. The new amalgamated school is called Scoil Náisiúnta Tuar Mhic Éadaigh.

For primary school children, the school bus route starts at Tourmakeady village in the morning and travels towards Srah village along what is locally known as the low road. The bus picks up four children on the low road, turns at Srah and returns to Tourmakeady along the same road.

There is, however, a top road, that is connected to this low road by a link road that is half a mile long. There are four families with ten children who live on the upper road and all these children attend Scoil Náisiúnta Tuar Mhic Éadaigh. It is common sense that for the sake of a few minutes and half a mile of road that the bus should collect the four children on the low road on the way to Srah and return on the top road on its way back to Tourmakeady to facilitate the ten children who live on the upper road. I am asking that the bus travel in a loop instead of going over and back on the same route.

The second issue is even more black and white. When Srah national school, a Gaelscoil, closed in June 2007, and amalgamated with Scoil Náisiúnta an Trian Láir to become Scoil Náisiúnta Tuar Mhic Éadaigh, the pupils from Srah were assured by the Department of Education and Science that they would be guaranteed school transport to get to the new school. A child whose name I have given to the Department was attending Srah school in 2007 and lived 1.9 miles from it. That child now attends the new school in Tourmakeady, which is five miles from his home. He applied for school transport but was told by Bus Éireann that because he was not attending his nearest school, Dereendafderg national school, he could only have transport at a cost of €200 per term. This came as a great surprise because Dereendafderg national school closed more than 35 years ago. Srah national school was the closest school when he attended in 2007 and now Tourmakeady is the closest school. The appropriate pick up point for this child is Derassa Cross. The school bus passes this cross anyway, meaning no change is required to the bus route. The child meets all the criteria to receive school transport free of charge. I ask that this is given to him as per his entitlement.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Seán Haughey)

I welcome this opportunity to outline to the House the Department's position regarding school transport for the children who attend scoil náisiúnta An Trianlair, County Mayo.

One of the main objectives of the school transport scheme is to provide a basic level of service for children who live long distances from schools and who might otherwise experience difficulty in attending regularly. Approximately 135,000 primary and post-primary pupils use the school transport scheme on a daily basis. The allocation for school transport in 2009 is €194 million.

Under the terms of the primary school transport scheme, pupils who reside 3.2 km or more from, and are attending, their nearest suitable national school, as determined by the Department of Education and Science, are eligible for free school transport. Primary school transport routes are generally planned by Bus Éireann so that, as far as possible, no eligible child will have more than 2.4 km to travel to a pick-up point. Pupils living off the main route of a service are generally expected to make their own way or to be brought to convenient pick-up points along the main route. Home pick-ups were never envisaged as being part of the school transport scheme, as the cost involved on a countrywide level would be prohibitive.

Bus Éireann, which operates the school transport service on behalf of the Department, is responsible for the day-to-day operation of school bus services. Bus routes are organised in such a way as to ensure that, as far as possible, eligible pupils have a reasonable level of service, while at the same time ensuring school transport vehicles are fully utilised in an efficient and cost-effective manner.

With regard to the specific cases referred to by the Deputy, Bus Éireann has advised that eligible children from the area in question have a school bus service to scoil náisiúnta An Trianlair within the guidelines of the scheme. However, the families are requesting the route of the existing service be changed. It is not always possible to facilitate families with such an alteration as many factors have to be taken into account, including timetabling, travel and waiting times, the road network and safety.

The planning of a school bus route is an operational matter for Bus Éireann. Notwithstanding the above, the Department has referred this case to Bus Éireann for review. The Department will keep Deputy Flynn updated following the review of the case.

I am pursuing the specific details in the case involving an all-Irish education within the Department and with Bus Éireann. I will respond to Deputy Flynn in this regard as soon as possible.

Deputy Flynn has raised these issues with me on several occasions. I thank her for the clarity of her presentation this evening. I have endeavoured to get Bus Éireann to bring these issues to a close and I will revert to the Deputy as soon as possible. I thank her again for raising these matters.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.25 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 2 April 2009.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 1 Apr 2009