Vol. 699 No. 3
1 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his plans for severe weather emergencies; if he will support local authorities financially to deal with the aftermath of the recent severe weather; his plans to do so; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2945/10]
All local authority major emergency plans, including sub-plans for responding to severe weather events, are based on A Framework for Major Emergency Management, which became operative on 30 September 2008. The framework and the plans detail a co-ordination structure that enables the principal response agencies — local authorities, An Garda Síochána and the Health Service Executive — to work together to optimum effect and to integrate with other services including the Defence Forces and voluntary organisations. These co-ordination structures can be used whether a major emergency is declared. It is a principle of emergency management internationally that the response to emergencies builds from the basic organisational units with capability to respond. In Ireland, the principal response agencies are based locally and, where necessary, regionally.
As regards financial support for local authorities arising from the recent severe weather, details of extra costs that may arise are not yet available. The potential costs associated with roads repairs will be a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Transport. Costs that may arise in respect of the repair of water mains damaged by the frost and the supply of water to residents who lost mains water supply will be considered when full details are available.
Having attended the national emergency response co-ordination committee, and in light of the interaction of the various Departments and statutory agencies, I am satisfied there was an active and sustained response to the recent severe weather conditions by the local authorities and the other principal response agencies, with the support of the Defence Forces and co-operation of other statutory and voluntary bodies. It will be important to learn from experience and accordingly a review of the emergency response co-ordination and inter-agency arrangements will be undertaken. This will assist in determining what further improvements can be achieved and identifying any relevant lessons that can be learned from the experience here and in other European countries over recent weeks.
I thank the front line services in local authorities and in all statutory bodies and agencies for the tremendous work they did over the past few months in dealing with flooding in the first instance and frost and snow in the past few weeks. In spite of funding cutbacks and staff cutbacks, they made a major contribution to keeping essential services going at local level. This was a first test of the Minister's national emergency plan. The website of the office of emergency planning was difficult to understand, stating: "a national framework for response to severe weather emergencies is being developed to ensure that all existing local severe weather plans are appropriately coordinated and linked." I want to bring this to the attention of the Minister and ask a question on it.
I am sure Deputy Hogan is referring to it rather than quoting from it.
I am referring directly to it in terms of what it says.
As Deputy Hogan knows, quotations are not in order.
Linkage and co-ordination is required. What linkage and co-ordination was carried out by the Department when it received plans from local authorities at the end of 2008? What appraisal was carried out? Was the Minister satisfied with all these particular plans and did he sign off on them? When will he receive submissions from local authorities indicating what moneys are required in order to deal effectively with the repairs to roads, water and other infrastructure damaged in the recent winter weather?
Regarding the last question, as Deputy Hogan knows, I have already received responses from local authorities. Deputy Hogan referred to this being a first test, but the flooding also presented a test. We reacted immediately. I was in a helicopter the very next day and visited Cork, Ennis and Ballinasloe. On every occasion I met with the managers. It was clear to see that at local level the co-ordination plans were working very well. On each occasion I met the emergency services. I am glad Deputy Hogan praised their efforts because they are fully deserving of praise. Their task was monumental and they went about it with great civic spirit. The communities also deserve praise for the way they dealt with it.
Deputy Ciarán Lynch may be interested in the fact that I met with two managers from Cork, Cork city and County Cork, and assured them that this Department would not be found wanting when it came to dealing with additional costs. We met with County Galway managers in Ballinasloe and I assured them of my support. Last December, I recouped savings in the Department and over €16 million was paid out to 19 local authorities for exceptional costs arising from the floods in November. The frost and severe weather we experienced recently has just come to an end and we are still considering the damage in a range of areas. We have heard much on potholes in roads recently but that relates to a different Department. In respect of water infrastructure, I will examine proposals from local authorities.
I take it the Minister is giving an undertaking that additional funds will be provided in 2010 arising from submissions received.
I am not giving any such an undertaking at this stage.
The Minister is saying there is no money and that he will not provide any money.
I will answer if Deputy Hogan asks a question.
The Minister should allow me to conduct the debate.
The Minister should put his money where his mouth is.
I have asked the Minister if he will give an undertaking in the House that additional funds will be provided to deal with water and other infrastructure. The Minister has some responsibility as a member of Government in charge of local government to ensure that services provided by local government are properly funded in respect of roads. It is only recently that local roads were transferred to the National Roads Authority and the Minister for Transport. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has a responsibility to ensure that local authorities are properly funded. The Minister did not open his mouth about the €173 million cut in roads last April.
I do not agree with the Deputy. The roads function and funding for roads, as Deputy Hogan knows too well, transferred to the Department of Transport. Deputy Hogan referred to websites earlier. I have looked at websites of various councils and have seen the budgets for winter maintenance. I discovered that Fine Gael, which has a majority on many of these councils, decided in its wisdom to cut the winter maintenance budget. Deputy Hogan can check this for himself. Deputy Hogan has a responsibility at local level because Fine Gael is in charge of those budgets.
They are starved of funds.
Pathetic.
That is a cop-out.
It is a cop-out on the part of Fine Gael. Even the small bit of responsibility it has, it cannot exercise.
When will the Minister make a decision on the submissions regarding funding to local authorities that affect his Department? I know it does not matter to you because you have only three councillors around the country but it matters to Fine Gael.
You have a majority and you are not exercising that responsibility.
The Minister should speak through the Chair.
I am talking directly to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
You said "you".
I must try to be very careful in the presence of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
In the presence of anyone who is in the Chair.
We will look at submissions but the most important issue is the water issue. I have examined some of Deputy Hogan's latest press releases, which state that we have cut water conservation grants. That is not the case; we will increase the amount of money for water conservation. I will make an announcement about that in the near future.
2 Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the number of leasing initiative properties in respect of which full funding approval has been issued that are unsold affordable dwellings; the number of same that are privately owned leased properties; if the title in relation to unsold leased affordable dwellings rests with the local authorities or with another entity; the average leasing cost of affordable homes; the person who has to pay and the location of payment; the average lease cost per month per unit size excluding unsold affordable dwellings; the number of affordable homes and privately leased properties obtained by individual local authorities as part of the leasing initiative that are now occupied; if the utilisation of unsold affordable dwellings in this manner indicates the end of the affordable housing scheme in its current format; the amount of the €20 million allocated for the leasing initiative in 2009 that has been drawn down; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2661/10]
At the end of 2009, 1,933 units had been sourced and approved under the social housing leasing initiative. Some 1,413 units — 1,331 unsold affordable units and 82 units sourced from the private sector — had received full approval by that date. A further 520 private units had been given provisional approval. Some 437 of the fully approved units are considered to be operational, as signed lease agreements are in place. They are either occupied or are in the course of occupation. Given that I did not introduce the initiative until February 2009, this represents significant progress. It shows that the initiative, even at this early stage, is starting to deliver. Under current arrangements, unsold affordable units are leased to approved housing bodies for a period of five years. During this period, the properties are used to accommodate households that are eligible for social housing support. The local authority retains ownership of the units throughout the lease period. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government recoups to each local authority the interest payments liable in respect of the loans taken by the authority to fund affordable properties in the first instance.
The average monthly cost for each affordable unit is €365. This compares to an average monthly cost of €456 for all other lease projects. A breakdown of the cost by unit size is not available. A total of €642,000 was spent under the leasing initiative in 2009. The full-year cost of the fully approved units is approximately €12 million. We will not set targets for additional delivery, in so far as affordable housing in general is concerned, this year. We will have regard to developments in the housing market. The emphasis will be on continuing to make progress with measures to ensure the most effective deployment of already delivered but unsold affordable homes. I refer to their use for social housing purposes, for example. The ultimate intention is that the bulk of the affordable units transferred to the social housing leasing initiative will be offered for sale in due course, either to social tenants or under affordable housing arrangements. The last time this issue was raised on Question Time, Deputy Ciarán Lynch asked for a breakdown of the cost of affordable units, as opposed to private units. I apologise for the failure to send that information on to him. It is included in today's response.
What is the average cost per unit of the non-affordable units?
The average cost of such units is €456 per month.
I thank the Minister of State for his reply. It seems that this initiative is taking on a life of its own. When the Minister of State announced in this Chamber that a long-term leasing programme was to be introduced, Deputies understood that it involved privately owned developments. Given that a significant sum of money was involved — we were told that €20 million a year would be spent over a 20-year period — questions were asked about whether this represented a bail-out for developers. We were told that the local authorities would hand back these properties to developers in 20 years' time. It now appears that over two thirds of these properties are affordable homes that are currently vacant. I understand that local authorities have 3,000 vacant affordable homes that they cannot sell. Do I understand correctly that just 82 of the approximately 1,500 properties that have been approved for leasing have come from the private sector? Has the Minister of State met the target that was set for the acquisition of privately owned properties for leasing? The figures I have mentioned do not indicate that is the case. Can the Minister of State explain why this initiative is becoming predominantly based on affordable homes?
This scheme, which was introduced in February 2009, was extended to voluntary bodies in September 2009. It was appropriate that many local authorities concentrated on dealing with their own unsold affordable stock during the first period of the scheme, as we did not want national stock to be sitting idle while people remained on the social housing lists. We will have to accept that local authorities prioritised that area. There is a natural lead-in to any new scheme — everything does not take off immediately. It is worth mentioning that we were within a small number of units of meeting the target of 2,000 that was set for 2009. In addition, hundreds of applications are being processed at present.
I do not accept that it is inappropriate for affordable houses to be used as part of the long-term leasing scheme. It is appropriate to include in the scheme properties in which public money has been invested. Approximately 1,300 such units are available, which is not that many. As of October 2009, local authorities estimated that they had 3,100 affordable homes on hand. Some 1,300 of those homes have been approved by the Department for temporary use as social housing under the leasing programme, with a further 800 in the process of being sold. According to the local authorities, fewer than 1,000 available units are on their hands at present. It is worth recording that 1,300 houses were sold under the affordable housing scheme in 2009. There continues to be a significant take-up of the scheme.
The Minister of State's response suggested that there is no clear strategy for dealing with two issues — the number of vacant houses throughout the country and the specific problem of affordable housing. Can the Minister of State tell the House how many vacant private properties there are in the State? I am not sure if he has the figures to hand. I will understand if he does not. It has been suggested that the accurate figure is anything between 50,000 and 300,000. Can the Minister of State give the Chamber any audit figures in response to that?
The difficulty with the affordable homes scheme is that the prices were set at the height of the property bubble. The properties that came on to the market last year had prices that were agreed two years earlier. Does the Minister of State agree that the fundamental difficulty with these properties is their price? If they are to be sold, I suggest that he should consider arranging for the prices to be dropped to reflect the current reality of the market. Everyone in this Chamber understood that the leasing initiative was put in place to acquire private properties for long-term leasing purposes. I will not comment on whether we agree with the politics behind that. If this scheme is to be opened up to affordable housing, so be it. When the scheme was announced, the target of 2,000 properties related to privately owned properties. How many of the properties that have been acquired are privately owned?
The Deputy has asked three questions. I have already said that 1,331 affordable units have been approved under the social housing leasing initiative. The local authorities and the voluntary bodies have acquired 289 and 313 private properties, respectively. As I have said, applications in respect of hundreds of other private properties are being processed at present. The scheme has had some success in the short period since it was established.
The Deputy also asked about vacant houses. I accept that all types of figures have been cited in the public media recently. We understand, on the basis of information compiled on a professional basis by our researchers, that the normal number of empty dwellings was exceeded by between 122,000 and 147,000 at the end of 2009. Deputies will appreciate that there are always houses that someone has bought but not yet moved into, for example. Such vacancies are short-term, by and large. Our figures are usually pretty accurate. I appreciate that people on the academic side have said there are 300,000 vacant houses. The report prepared for us by DKM provided estimates of total stocks of empty properties of between 228,000 and 253,000. The number of houses that are available for use is in region of 122,000.
3 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if, in view of a High Court decision in favour of An Bord Pleanála in October 2009, whether he is supporting a Supreme Court appeal against the grant of permission by An Bord Pleanála for the Galway city outer bypass; the discussions he or his officials have had with the person (details supplied) initiating the court action on this matter; if financial or other supports are being provided by the State; if he has supported other cases in which objections or litigation were initiated against planning authorities or An Bord Pleanála; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2946/10]
Separate judicial review proceedings challenging An Bord Pleanála's decision to approve part of the Galway city outer bypass project were taken by a residents' group, Hands Across the Corrib, and an individual, Mr. Peter Sweetman. The grounds for review included claims that the board had erred in law in giving its approval and had misinterpreted provisions of the habitats directive. The State was named as a respondent.
Arising from discussions with the European Commission, it was clear that infringement action against the State and possible injunctive proceedings were likely to ensue if the project proceeded based on this planning consent. Following consultations with the Attorney General, the State contended in the High Court that An Bord Pleanála had misinterpreted the habitats directive. On 9 October 2009, the High Court upheld the board's decision. Following the High Court ruling, the State and Mr. Sweetman separately sought leave to appeal the judgment to the Supreme Court. Leave to appeal was granted on 6 November 2009 on the basis that the issue involved a point of law of exceptional public importance. The correct interpretation of the habitats directive is critical not only for the purpose of this project but also for future projects.
Neither I nor my Department have had discussions with Mr. Sweetman or Hands Across the Corrib in regard to this case. Neither party is in receipt of financial or other supports from my Department. The question of who meets the costs of various parties to the case is a matter for the courts to determine. I have not supported any other objections or litigation initiated by Mr. Sweetman or Hands Across the Corrib against local authorities or An Bord Pleanála.
The Minister would agree that everyone in Galway would like the matter to be resolved because the outer bypass is an essential part of the city's infrastructure and will benefit the people of the area. Is it not unusual that the Minister cannot discuss the matter with the National Roads Authority without recourse to the High Court? Is he supporting the Supreme Court appeal? What has been the cost to the State of the proceedings thus far and the estimated cost of the Supreme Court proceedings?
I am not in a position to outline for the Deputy the costs of the proceedings because, as he will be aware, they will take some time to quantify. This is a contentious point of law and we have to get it right because the habitats directive is extremely important. The case revolves around the interpretation of article 6 of the directive and involves the construction of a road through a special area of conservation, SAC. The road's footprint will comprise over 20 hectares within the SAC and will necessitate the destruction of a sizeable area of habitat, including limestone pavement, which is a priority habitat under the directive. I have dealt with this matter at length on a number of occasions because I regard it as highly important.
The board determined that the damage was not significant in the context of the overall site but my legal advice and the clear view of the Commission is that the board's interpretation is not consistent with the directive. I am advised that the board should have concluded that the damage constituted an adverse impact on the integrity of the site and that consent could only have been granted if the project met the requirements of the derogation procedure provided by the directive. Derogations are allowed where an overriding public interest can be demonstrated. It is crucial to point out that the board decided not to avail of this option. Commission officials have made it clear that if a remedy is not found to setting aside the board's decision, further action would be considered.
A less costly solution should have been found. The Minister could have discussed the issues with the Minister for Transport rather than resort to the High Court. Would he accept that it would have been preferable to address the matter through Departments and State agencies rather than incur these enormous costs?
If a Fianna Fáil Minister entered into litigation in support of one of his or her own, as the Minister, Deputy Gormley, is doing in respect of Mr. Sweetman, the Green Party would be jumping up and down to criticise political interference. Mr. Sweetman is a former Green Party candidate. He is entitled to pursue his action but the fact that the Minister is supporting this at the taxpayer's expense creates the perception that he is on the side of Mr. Sweetman, even though the High Court has dismissed his case.
The Deputy should not make adverse comment on anybody who is not in the House.
I did not mention any names until the Minister identified Mr. Sweetman.
Deputy Hogan is certainly impugning my integrity.
No, I am not.
He implied that I am in cahoots with someone who was a member of my party many years ago. That very serious allegation is completely untrue and I hope it is withdrawn.
I did not make any such allegation. The Minister is sensitive.
What he is trying to say would be very clear to anybody listening to our discussion. An Board Pleanála is entirely independent. It makes decisions all the time and I would not agree with all of them. However, in terms of Ireland Inc., the board would be seen as representing Ireland in interpreting the habitats directive. We have to extricate ourselves from that difficulty. Following clear legal advice and working in conjunction with the Commission we came to this sensible decision. I am mindful of what the Commission expects from this country. We have dealt with a number of infringement proceedings but we cannot afford to continue infringing in this way because we must comply with our European obligations.
4 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if, in view of water shortages in many parts of the country, he will develop a new national policy initiative or funding scheme to address water leakages and the current nationwide water shortage problems; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2947/10]
In the last ten years a total of €1.8 billion has been invested by the Exchequer in a new water supply infrastructure under the water services investment programme. Recent water services investment programmes have also included specific sub-programmes on water conservation. Funding was provided to local authorities to put in place water management systems to monitor water use and losses throughout supply networks, fix leaks and replace defective pipes where repair is no longer an economic option.
Exchequer spending on water conservation over the last ten years amounted to €168 million. This investment provides the platform for intensive investment in mains rehabilitation as this is a key priority under the next water services investment programme for 2010-12, which is currently being finalised in my Department. In inviting local authorities to prepare needs assessments as an input to developing the new programme, the authorities were asked to prioritise key contracts and schemes in this area and they will also be required to prioritise water conservation works as an alternative to new infrastructure provision. A greater proportion of the funds available annually under the programme will be assigned specifically to water conservation works.
Current water supply problems are being managed by local authorities as best they can through intensive efforts to identify and repair leaks and by encouraging the public to use water sparingly. Authorities are also reducing pressure in their systems and, as a last resort, cutting off water supplies at night time in order to optimise the management of reservoir storage. Arrangements have been put in place to provide tanker water to areas without piped water supplies.
Everyone was surprised at the extent of the water shortages during the winter crisis, although leaks go with the territory given the weather we experienced. Ireland does not appear to be as well prepared for the type of weather we experienced this winter as other European countries. What lessons have we learned about water conservation and leaks? Has the Minister prepared a plan to prevent future incidents? His Department provides 70% of the necessary finance for projects and, despite opposition from his Cabinet colleagues, he has held the line on maintaining expenditure in 2010. However, this will not be enough to meet the requirements of 2015 or the challenges that arose during the severe weather crisis. When will the Minister make an announcement regarding expenditure for 2010? Does he propose to devise a new approach to deal with the types of problems that arose during the recent severe weather crisis?
Local authorities have invested €130 million in water conservation projects since 2003, most of which came from Exchequer funds. I can say with absolute certainty that this sum will be substantially exceeded in the three-year period of the next water services investment programme from 2010 to 2012. I will make an announcement shortly in that regard.
The degree of leakage varies considerably in different local authority areas from 16.8% to 58.6%. In Dublin, for example, we have managed through investment to reduce the rate of leakage to some 28%, but that remains unacceptably high. We must recognise that water is a scarce resource. I refer here to treated water which costs more than €1 billion per annum. In other words, domestic customers are mistaken if they believe they are getting free water. We are all paying for it in some form.
The programme for Government includes a commitment to introduce a system for metering of water where customers will have to pay for consumption in excess of a certain threshold. If people were paying such charges already, it is unlikely they would have allowed their taps to run as they did during the recent severe weather. What is required is a change of mindset. In this new era water is a scarce resource which must be treated with care.
I am pleased the Minister referred to a "new era". I am sure he has studied Fine Gael's NewERA document which outlines our proposals for stimulating the economy through investment. It offers plenty of scope in this area.
It does not offer any costings.
Deputy Hogan must put a question to the Minister.
I will be glad to assist the Minister in regard to the costings. Will he indicate the precise level of investment required to bring us into line with our obligations in regard to water investment by 2015 and to deal with the water shortage problems? In the Dublin city and county area, for example, there is a problem in regard to the capacity of treatment plants. Can the Minister update us on when investment will be prioritised in that area in order to increase capacity there?
As I indicated, we are making assessments and will increase substantially the amount to be invested in water conservation in the same way as we fulfilled our commitment to invest in flood protection. Investment will happen because it is an absolute necessity. During the cold snap there was demand in the Dublin area of some 624 megalitres, which broke all previous records. The level of demand will increase in general as our population increases. Apart from the need to replace pipes, there are various other issues to consider in this regard. For example, I have introduced new building regulations relating to dual flush. Some of the existing pipes were poorly laid, which is a question of building regulations, and consideration must be given to that. A multifaceted approach is required.
We will make an assessment of the damage that has been done and investment will continue apace. The recent difficulties drive home the point that our water supply is precious. We have had problems in the State with substandard drinking water as a consequence of cryptosporidium pollution. The current and recent water shortages have been severe, with people in parts of my constituency going without water for seven or eight days. It is unacceptable in a First World country that people should have to endure what is not merely inconvenience, but hardship.
5 Deputy Phil Hogan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the financial liability of the taxpayer in the event of a breach of contract regarding the construction and operation of the Poolbeg waste to energy facility, Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2948/10]
The facility in question is being advanced by Dublin City Council, acting on behalf of the four Dublin local authorities in the context of their statutory regional waste management plan, by way of a public private partnership, PPP. The State is not a party to this PPP agreement and has undertaken no financial or other liability in respect of this project.
As I previously indicated, it is my understanding that the quantities of residual waste currently being collected by the Dublin local authorities may not be sufficient to meet the volumetric contractual commitment which forms part of the public private partnership agreement. Any inability on the part of the authorities to meet this commitment could give rise to public financial implications which would be a matter for those authorities to address. My concern in this regard is linked to my determination to ensure that the pathway to economic recovery on which we are now embarked does not lead to a business as usual approach to waste generation or to the management of the waste which might result from increased consumption. Rather, I am determined to secure significant decoupling of waste arising from future growth and, to that end, I will bring proposals to Government to implement key recommendations of the international review of waste management policy published in November 2009.
In these circumstances, I have decided that the most appropriate course of action is to appoint an authorised person under section 224 of the Local Government Act 2001 to conduct a review of the parameters of the project. This will address the nature and extent of financial and related risks and consequences which may arise for Dublin City Council in connection with its participation in the project agreement, in a changing policy, legal and economic environment.
Has Government policy on waste changed since 2007 and, if so, in what way? I refer to a Government decision rather than ministerial statements. Has the Minister the power to prevent the arrangement between Dublin City Council and Covanta in respect of the Poolbeg incinerator from proceeding?
It is clear that Government policy in this area has changed in many aspects. I have introduced various regulations including, for example, provision to ensure that we increase the amount of waste collected from food outlets. That regulation will be enacted in June. We have clearly stated that incineration will no longer be the cornerstone of policy.
What is the position now?
I am saying clearly that incineration is not the cornerstone of waste policy.
Is that a Government decision?
Of course. How many times do I have to say it?
In regard to the project in question, I said in my reply that it has been put forward by Dublin County Council. It may be embarrassing for Deputy Hogan to be reminded that it was his party's councillors who voted for the proposal to be included as part of the waste plan.
When will the Minister put a stop it?
They were told at the time by my colleagues on Dublin City Council that this would invariably lead to the project going ahead, but they ignored that advice and voted in favour in any case.
The Minister could stop it now.
It is important that people understand this facility has a capacity of some 600,000 tonnes and, as such, will have a major impact on the waste market. The judgment before Christmas by Mr. Justice McKechnie was in line with the contention of the waste industry, namely, that the facility should be reduced in size and that it will have the effect of being anti-competitive. The authorised officer who will look at the contract will be in the best position to make a judgment regarding all the various aspects of the case.
When will the authorised officer be appointed and when will that person report? Will he or she underwrite any particular costs or breaches of contract on behalf of the taxpayer if he or she is serious about stopping this project?
I hope to meet the proposed authorised officer this week, after which that person should be in a position to commence work very quickly. We will have to examine how long it will take to complete the task but I hope it can be done as quickly as possible. I will report back to the Oireachtas as soon as the authorised officer reports to me. It is vital that we engage in this process in order to avoid at all costs a situation where there is a significant contingent liability on the taxpayer.
