Adjournment Debate

Adult Education

Deputy Dominic Hannigan

I congratulate the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, on his appointment and wish him well in his new role. We previously served together in the Seanad.

I welcome the opportunity to discuss the issue of post-leaving certificate courses, or PLCs as they are also known. Such courses were introduced in 1985 and have been a tremendous success, with hundreds of thousands of students throughout the country attending them. In counties Louth and Meath they have been of great assistance is allowing people to obtain additional qualifications in child care, community care, telecommunications, etc. I have taken a keen interest in the PLCs offered in my locality at the Dunboyne College of Further Education. I have attended many of the college's graduation ceremonies and I will be attending the next one in early May. I am always struck by the level of enthusiasm and hope among the students at such ceremonies.

Dunboyne College of Further Education was established a number of years ago as part of St. Peter's community college, which is the local secondary school. The numbers attending the college have increased significantly, with a current enrolment of 380 students. However, the maximum number of students in respect of which the college receives funding — that is, the cap — is only 233. If effect, therefore, it is educating almost 150 students without receiving any money at all in respect of them.

I raised this matter when I was a Member of the Upper House and the then Minister lifted the cap. However, we are still at the point where the cap which applies in County Meath is below the national average. As a result, an increase must be forthcoming. The benefits of introducing such an increase will be clear to people who attend colleges such as that to which I refer. More people would certainly attend such institutions if further places were available. The agreed programme for Government contains a commitment to increase the number of places available in education and, in such circumstances, I ask the Minister of State to increase the cap at Dunboyne.

I also wish to refer to the issue of accommodation at the Dunboyne College of Further Education. The college rents premises in the local industrial estate. It has managed to secure a site nearby, however, which is adjacent to the new Dunboyne rail station and the local bus stop and which would accommodate a new campus. I understand the site has been zoned and that work can proceed. I have also been told that officials in the Minister's Department are well aware of the proposal. I ask the Minister to provide us with the view of the Department on the development of the site. Has the Minister investigated the potential development of the site as a campus? If so, does he have a timescale for when the site might be developed?

I appreciate the Minister's time on this matter.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Ciarán Cannon)

I thank Deputy Hannigan for raising this issue and for his words of congratulations. I reciprocate by congratulating him on his election to Dáil Éireann. I know how much it means to him.

Dunboyne College of Further Education is managed through St. Peter's College, Dunboyne by County Meath VEC to provide courses under my Department's post-leaving certificate programme. The PLC programme is a self-contained whole-time learning experience designed to provide successful participants with specific vocational skills to enhance their prospects of securing lasting, full-time employment or to progress to other studies. It caters for those who have completed senior cycle education and require further vocational education and training as well as adults who may not have completed the senior cycle but who are returning to education and who have skills and competencies which enable them to undertake the courses.

There are almost 31,700 approved PLC places nationwide enabling almost 38,700 learners to participate in PLC courses. This is a commendable achievement by VECs and other PLC providers and I hope this can be maintained. For each approved place, my Department provides a staffing allocation and non-pay capitation. The majority of these places are provided by VECs in recognised VEC schools and stand-alone PLC colleges, but also in voluntary secondary schools and community and comprehensive schools across the country. There are almost 200 approved PLC centres nationwide. Places are allocated to VECs and other providers on an annual basis following an application process, and VECs are responsible for the further allocation of those places to schools and colleges under their aegis. Separately, following an annual application process, my Department approves PLC courses to be delivered. PLC courses are generally of one or two years duration and are at levels 5 and 6 on the national framework of qualifications.

The number of PLC places allocated to County Meath VEC has more than doubled in the past five years, from 136 in the 2004-05 academic year to 306 for the current academic year 2010-11. The VEC delivers PLC courses in three approved PLC centres: Dunboyne College of Further Education; St. Oliver's Post-Primary School, Oldcastle, and Beaufort College, Navan. There is also one other approved PLC provider in County Meath: Boyne Community School, Trim, which has an allocation of 22 places. This means there are almost 330 PLC places in County Meath. Enrolment data for the 2010-11 academic year provided by schools to my Department, indicates that total PLC enrolment in County Meath VEC is 470 and that there is a total of 380 PLC learners enrolled in Dunboyne College of Further Education.

On the development of Dunboyne College of Further Education specifically, I must inform the Deputy that my Department has no record of receiving an application for funding for capital works in respect of the college.

All schools are eligible to submit an application for major capital funding to my Department. Any application received will be assessed in accordance with the published prioritisation criteria for large scale building projects and in the context of my Department's multi-annual school building and modernisation programme. The published prioritisation criteria were formulated following consultation with the education partners. There are four band ratings under these criteria, each of which describes the extent of accommodation required and the urgency attaching to it. Band 1 is the highest priority rating and Band 4 is the lowest.

On PLC provision nationally, the number of approved PLC places is set at its current level of 31,688 because there is a continuing requirement to plan and control numbers and to manage expenditure within the context of overall educational policy and provision.

The programme for Government contains a commitment that the Government will create an additional 60,000 places across a range of education and employment programmes for the unemployed. Within this total an additional 30,000 training places will be delivered across the education and training system. My Department will work with education and training providers to deliver these additional places over the coming period.

Smithfield Market

Deputy Joe Costello

It is with a heavy heart that I seek legislation to abolish the Smithfield horse fair. My colleagues and I in Dublin Central and my former colleagues on Dublin City Council have been dealing with the matter for a number of years. The Minister would have known about this when he was a member of Dublin City Council.

The fair in Smithfield has been in existence for centuries. Cattle, vegetables, hay and fruit were traded in Smithfield and the fish market was just down the road. All of this was an integral part of the area and the tradition of trading activity is a long one. The horse fair is a more recent feature but nevertheless has trading rights in the area.

Dublin City Council made major investment in the area through the Heritage Area Rejuvenation Project, HARP, which changed a derelict part of the inner city into an area with quite an amount of residential and retail property. The city council invested in the area and encouraged private investment to develop the area. At present, €5 million is being spent on further enhancement. Quite a number of residents live in Smithfield and there is an amount of retail activity.

However, the area has been dogged by certain difficulties, one of which is the horse fair. We sought to deal with some of these difficulties through the Control of Horses Act 1996. We sought alternative accommodation for the horse fair and set up an equestrian centre in Ballyfermot.

Nevertheless, the problem remains. The fair has degenerated to an unacceptable degree. There have been serious problems which pose a danger to life and limb and to animal welfare. The space is more constricted than in the past and will be further constricted by the enhancement works that are taking place. We must accept that one cannot have a major horse fair in the heart of the capital city, with horses streaming in from different suburban areas. Some come on foot along the streets and are taken away in the same fashion, with all that entails for the roads and pavements.

I ask the Minister to look at the possibility of finding an alternative site, although it is difficult to see where that alternative site can be found. It is time for this House to decide whether Smithfield is an appropriate location for horse trading, which is in itself a desirable activity and takes places in many parts of the country. If we decide Smithfield is not an appropriate location, and all the arguments seem to be to that effect, we should move speedily, introduce legislation and abolish the present horse fair in Smithfield.

Minister for Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation (Deputy Richard Bruton)

I thank Deputy Costello for raising this important issue today. As Deputy Costello has acknowledged, he and I have had some private discussions on this matter and also with Deputy Paschal Donohoe. This is a problem, but an extremely complex one, as the Deputy is aware.

The Smithfield market has existed as a market for some centuries. Its remit is under the Dublin Corporation Act 1890, which gave the Corporation powers to set fees and take tolls. The Act also set out the geographic limits of the market. The Casual Trading Act 1980 introduced a dual system whereby my Department issued a national casual trading licence and those local authorities who wished to regulate within their own functional areas could if they so wished issue a local casual trading permit. National marketing licences were regulated by the Department and local licences were regulated by the city council. It was decided in 1995 that a national Department regulating local markets was an anomaly and the Casual Trading Act 1995 devolved all operational matters relating to casual trading to the local authorities.

Section 2(1) of the Casual Trading Act 1995 defined casual and gave local authorities the ability to regulate. It was recognised in that Act that there existed so-called ancient market rights and these were treated differently. Section 1(1) of the Casual Trading Act 1995, defines a market right as, "a right conferred by franchise or statute to hold a fair or market, that is to say, a concourse of buyers and sellers to dispose of commodities". Many of these market rights arose prior to 1922 and many are contained in charters granted by monarchs or local nobility to individuals or to towns or cities. Others are statute based usually from the nineteenth century. Whereas the Act of 1980 excluded selling goods in public places pursued under a market right, the Act of 1995 brought this category of selling clearly within the ambit of casual trading legislation.

Given that the selling of goods in a public place pursuant to a market right was a special category of selling, casual trading legislation had special provisions to deal with them. In the case of trading in what might be termed ordinary casual trading areas the local authority can designate the trading pitches and likewise remove this designation once they comply with all the procedures in section 6 of the Act. The situation regarding trading in areas covered by the more ancient market rights is different. The legislation allows local authorities to regulate trading in areas covered by a market right but to remove or to extinguish this market right requires a special procedure. This is described in section 8 of the Casual Trading Act 1995. The most important provision of that section is that in order to extinguish a market right the local authority must provide "alternative facilities in the same vicinity as the market or fair to which the right relates and comprising or including facilities reasonably corresponding in all respects, having regard to all the circumstances, to the market or fair". Further, the local authority must publish notice of its proposal to extinguish the market right and must give notice in writing to anyone appearing to the local authority to have an interest in the right. Under section 8(5)(a) of the Act of 1995, any person aggrieved by the proposal to extinguish the market right can appeal to the District Court and from there to the Circuit Court. The extinguishment of a market right is a reserved function for the members of a local authority. Therefore it is clear that there is a procedure for extinguishing a right like that in Smithfield but in all cases the local authority has the legal competence to acquire that right either by agreement or compulsorily. If this happens the local authority can go through the process I have just described in section 8 to extinguish the market right and this is what can lead to a complication of the market in question.

The lord mayor of Dublin has written to me requesting me to introduce legislation to extinguish the market right at Smithfield and Deputy Costello has reiterated that request. However, it is clear that this law is complex and each market may have to be examined in its own right, bearing in mind the statute or charter under which it was established and the history of regulation of that market right over time. My Department has made a detailed submission to the Office of the Attorney General seeking advice on the matter and the Department's powers in this area. It is not open to me as Minister and I would not be the competent authority to find alternative sites under the existing legislation were the council to proceed in that way. The council would be better placed to identify alternative sites within its own remit than would my Department.

The legislation covering casual trading covers the sale of goods. However, there are other interests involved in the Smithfield market which concern other competent public bodies. The events at the market in early March were of a public order nature. There is also an issue of animal welfare. These events arose out of various public order offences. The policy on public order is a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality and on an operational basis for the Garda Síochána. Concerns have been expressed regarding animal welfare which is covered under the Control of Horses Act 1996 and the Protection of Animals Acts 1911 and 1965. These Acts provide considerable scope for the local authority to control all aspects of the behaviour of horses and their owners in urban and other areas. There may be another dimension by means of those Acts to pursue this matter. While it is clear that existing legislation allows for the regulation of the sale of horses in the market in Smithfield, and there is the power of extinguishment, this is on the basis of Dublin City Council finding alternative sites if it is initiating that power. I will wait to see if other dimensions to this legislation would allow some other solution to be sponsored through my Department. I look forward to receiving the advice of the Attorney General on this matter.

Agricultural Schemes

Deputy Thomas Pringle

I refer to the announcement yesterday of the agri-environment options scheme, AEOS, scheme for 2011 and this is to be welcomed. However, there is great disappointment within the farming community at the cap placed on the expenditure and entry into the scheme. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Simon Coveney, has announced the scheme for 8,000 applicants with an expenditure limit of €25 million. Given that the average payment to farmers under last year's scheme was €4,200, this means that to have a scheme equivalent to last year would require funding of over €33 million. Farmers can now expect to have the amount of funding allocated per successful applicant to be reduced significantly to meet the budgeted target, a reduction of over €1,000 per applicant.

It is expected that 11,000 farmers nationally will come out of REPS 3 this year. With only 8,000 places available, very few farmers with marginal land in disadvantaged areas will qualify for entry. Based on this allocation, the scheme will barely provide for farmers with land in commonage, SACs and SPAs. In County Donegal alone, 840 farmers will be coming out of REPS this year and a further 1,040 next year. Many farmers in areas of Donegal, from Killybegs through Dunkineely, Donegal town to Laghey, will have little hope of gaining entry to this new scheme. This will mean they will suffer a significant drop in income support. The REPS and AEOS schemes are environmental protection schemes but as well as protecting and enhancing the environment REPS have in particular become vital in supporting farm families, as will the agri-environment options scheme, AEOS.

The schemes have also contributed to the local economy by providing income to local traders and suppliers where farmers have sold supplies in their local community to enhance their farms. The consequence will be depressed demand in the local economy and with the subsequent loss to the State in VAT and income tax returns. I fail to see, when 50% of the funding comes from the EU to support this scheme, why the Government could not find sufficient revenue to support a scheme with at least as much funding and access as the AEOS from 2010.

During the election campaign, Fine Gael candidates all over the country gave cast iron guarantees to farmers and IFA representatives that the AEOS would be protected and continue in the same form as existed at the time. Farmers took these promises in good faith and now feel a sense of betrayal when just a few short weeks into government, the new AEOS has been significantly reduced. They are very worried when they read the press release from the Minister's office, which states: "Due to the diminishing resources available to the Department in the coming years the Minister confirmed that significant savings would have to be achieved across a wide range of schemes and services in the 2012 Vote for his Department". Farmers should be worried because based on this announcement there will be greater reductions in available schemes for farmers. In the case of County Donegal, with 1,040 farmers coming out of REPS next year, there will be little hope of an adequate scheme for them to apply to. The closure of REPS by the previous Government and now the reduction of the AEOS will undermine confidence and will hit vulnerable less profitable cattle and sheep farmers. Farmers need a stable replacement scheme and not be left wondering what cuts will be made in coming years.

Farmers have to question the Government's commitment to Food Harvest 2020 and the role the Government foresees for the farming sector in the economic revival of rural areas. Food production and security should be an essential part in the overall strategic interests of the country but this reduction in supports and, as the Minister has indicated, further reductions next year and onwards, will leave farmers wondering where rural Ireland stands in the Government's plans.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Simon Coveney)

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter as it gives me an opportunity to provide some clarity on a number of the issues he raised. I recall vividly while in Opposition being extremely frustrated with Ministers who chose to read long scripts and offer history lessons on schemes which were not relevant to the questions being asked. I will, therefore, address the specific issues the Deputy raised without recourse to my script, which he can read at a later stage as it contains some useful information.

I will comment first on the commitment given on the agri-environment options scheme, AEOS, by Fine Gael Party candidates during the election campaign. This commitment was based on the announcement by the previous Government that an agri-environment options scheme would be introduced, which would be worth €50 million and would have a ceiling of €5,000 for each of the 10,000 likely applicants. We assumed the scheme was accounted for in the four year expenditure and budget plan to which the Government signed up. When I entered my Department five weeks ago, however, I encountered a problem in respect of the scheme.

I understand the important role environmental schemes, including the rural environmental protection scheme, have played in the past five to ten years, especially in disadvantaged areas along the west and north-west coasts. Having been to agricultural college, I also understand the farming community. It was a major challenge for me to put in place an agri-environment options scheme because I was informed that the budget for this year and next year does not make any allocation for the scheme announced by the previous Government. Instead, we have a commitment under the four year plan to reduce current expenditure in my Department by €60 million. I was told in no uncertain terms by the Department of Finance that if I wanted to sponsor a new agri-environment options scheme to the tune of €30 million, €40 million or €50 million, I must find equivalent savings in my Department. This requirement arises from the expenditure ceilings to which we have signed up as part of the bailout deal if we are to access the stability fund. This is simple reality and I will not pretend it is not a problem. I and my officials must find imaginative solutions in next year's budget to try to minimise cuts in expenditure and payments in farmers. We will spend the entire summer trying to find these solutions.

I was determined to introduce an agri-environment options scheme because, as Deputy Pringle noted, approximately 11,000 farmers are completing REPS in the expectation that they will be able to avail of a new environmental scheme which will encourage them to farm in an environmentally friendly manner and supplement their income. For many farmers, REPS payments make up their entire profits. I had an obligation to try to do something for this group by prioritising them in any scheme I proposed to introduce. I have done this in the agri-environment options scheme. Farmers from special areas of conservation, special protection areas and commonage areas will have automatic access to the scheme and will be given priority over all other farmers.

The Deputy is correct that I have imposed an expenditure ceiling of €25 million on the scheme for next year and the year thereafter and we have set a maximum payment per applicant of €4,000. The average payment last year under the agri-environment options scheme was €3,800, not €4,200 as the Irish Farmers' Association has stated. I corrected representatives of the IFA on this figure when I met them last night. I deliberately set the payment ceiling for applicants entering the scheme in the coming months at a level higher than the average payment for last year.

The Department estimates that the average payment next year and in 2013 will be between €3,000 and €3,500, with the figure in commonage areas likely to be at the higher end of the scale. We also expect between 7,500 and 8,000 applicants for the scheme. Approximately 4,000 and 4,500 farmers located in special areas of conservation, special protection areas and commonage areas may apply for the scheme. They will be automatically entitled to payments provided they meet the criteria and will be given priority. The remaining places, of which there will be roughly 4,000, will be determined on the basis of whether an applicant was previously in REPS and on farm size. In other words, we will prioritise farmers with smallholdings and those who do not have significant income from commercial farming or have had their income supplemented by environmental farming or other support schemes such as disadvantaged area payments.

I would have found it impossible to secure approval from the Department of Finance to pay out more than the ceiling of €25 million for next year and 2013. It would not have been possible for me to achieve sufficient reductions in expenditure in other areas to meet a higher cost.

I have fought for the past two weeks to ensure we have an agri-environment options scheme that would enable me to offer something to farmers emerging from the rural environmental protection scheme, specifically in Deputy Pringle's area of the north-west. I accept the scheme does not meet everyone's expectations. Farmers in receipt of REPS payments of €12,000 or €15,000 are facing a payment next year of €4,000, which is a significant decline in income. I accept that the position is not ideal and wish I could have established a scheme worth €50 million for the next two years. I would have done so if I could have afforded such a scheme but I had to battle to have €25 million allocated to the scheme. Even this will cause major headaches for me in the four or five months leading up to the Estimates process.

I will not mislead farmers, as the previous Government did, by pretending we have easy solutions when no such solutions are available. There is much good news in farming in terms of prices. The agri-environment options scheme should be welcomed on the basis that something is available, although I accept it is a disappointment for many farmers who were expecting more. I will continue to maximise the payments I can allocate directly to farmers by making the necessary reductions in expenditure and finding efficiencies and making savings, where appropriate. However, I do not have access to a pot of gold, nor would the Department of Finance allow me to source money that does not exist.

I have allocated a significant amount of money and I am prioritising those who need it most, the majority of whom come from the Deputy's part of the country.

Hospital Services

Deputy Jonathan O’Brien

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me an opportunity to discuss the proposed transfer of services from St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital to the South Infirmary. The former hospital is located in a large green area on the north side of Cork city, has plenty of space available to it to develop and expand services and has one of the lowest infection rates of any hospital in the State. It also has ample room for parking and is located on a bus route and near local services. As an orthopaedic hospital set on large grounds, it is clearly ideal for orthopaedic patients.

Under the hospital reconfiguration plan, it is proposed to move the services of St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital to the South Infirmary, a city centre hospital located on a cramped site with no parking space and with access problems. The proposal does not make any sense. If services are moved to the South Infirmary, fewer orthopaedic beds will be available.

Prior to the general election the Fine Gael Party gave, in its own words, a "cast iron guarantee" that, in government, it would ensure that St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital remained open and services would not be transferred to the South Infirmary. The current Minister, Deputy James Reilly, supported this guarantee. In light of a debate which has arisen since the general election on whether Fine Gael gave a cast iron guarantee or simply promised to hold a review, I checked the statements made prior to the election and listened to a number of radio debates. In fact, a review was not mentioned. The statement made was that if Fine Gael was in government, the hospital would stay open and services would not be transferred. As a result, people feel very betrayed. A U-turn is happening here.

The review being undertaken is a sham for several reasons. We have yet to be told the terms of reference for the review, who will carry out the review or how long it will take. Will patients and members of staff be consulted? When will a report be published on foot of the review? When will a decision be made on the transfer of services? I will explain why those questions are important. I accept that the Minister, Deputy Reilly, has said services will not be transferred while this review is taking place. Work is ongoing in the South Infirmary, however, to ensure it will be ready to accept these services after it has been decided to transfer them. We are being told the transfer of services has been halted pending the outcome of the review ordered by the Minister, but at the same time the review is being undermined by the continuation of work at the alternative site. The operating theatres are being constructed and other work is proceeding. If the work at the South Infirmary is not halted for the duration of this review, we will reach a stage at which the transfer of services to that location will become financially viable. The people of my constituency are angry about that. The work that is under way at the South Infirmary has to cease now.

There is a perception — to be honest, it is fair — that the review is potentially no more than a smokescreen. When I met hospital workers last week, we realised we share the opinion that the Government wants to get to a point at which the work at the South Infirmary site has progressed so far that there is no option other than to transfer these services. The people of my constituency of Cork North-Central, which has been neglected by a Fianna Fáil Government for 14 years, would like to be reassured that this is not the case. As a result of their decision to vote for change, Deputy Dara Murphy, who is present for this debate, and I were elected to represent the constituency in this Chamber. The people were tired of Fianna Fáil Government, tired of broken promises and tired of a lack of investment in the constituency. They wanted something different. There is no way the people I represent will take this decision lying down.

The time for political rhetoric has ended. When I tabled a written question on this matter to the Minister two weeks ago, the answer I received was not worth the paper on which it was written, to be honest. I wish to specify the questions I want answered. The people of Cork North-Central deserve to get answers. I am not interested in scripted responses. I asked for this Adjournment debate so that I could put these questions and get answers to them. People want clarity on this issue. What are the terms of reference for the review? Who will carry out the review? When will it start? When will it finish? When will the Minister publish its findings? Will the review consult patient groups and members of staff? We want a cast-iron guarantee that the Minister will give a commitment to stop work at the South Infirmary site pending the outcome of the review.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Róisín Shortall)

I am responding on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Reilly. I thank Deputy O'Brien for raising the issue. The Minister recently asked the HSE to identify any cases in which it plans to withdraw services from individual acute hospitals in the coming months and to brief the Minister on the circumstances and implications in each case. I assure the Deputy that this is not a smokescreen. The Minister has made it quite clear that he wants the HSE to set out its intentions in an up-front and clear manner. Pending such a briefing, the Minister has asked the HSE not to withdraw or transfer any acute services. If the HSE considers that a change in service arrangements is urgently needed in an individual case, the Minister has required the HSE to inform him of the reasons for this and the steps being taken.

In May 2010, as part of a wider plan to organise acute hospital services in the Cork and Kerry region in the safest and most efficient way, the HSE announced its intention to relocate orthopaedic services, including elective inpatient, rehabilitation, trauma and day surgery, from St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital to the South Infirmary Victoria University Hospital. This would involve the establishment of a new paediatric orthopaedic service in the South Infirmary Victoria University Hospital to cater for the needs of children from the region who currently attend Our Lady's Children's Hospital in Crumlin. The proposals involve the retention of remaining services, such as mental health, intellectual disability, ambulance, outreach maternity and health centre services, at the St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital campus. They also involve the provision of a new community nursing unit to provide 30 replacement and 20 new residential places for older people.

The Minister will discuss these issues with the HSE in the context of the provision of acute hospital services in a clinically appropriate and efficient manner. Pending the completion of this process, there will be no change to the current service arrangements at St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital. I take the Deputy's point that the undertaking of reviews while work is ongoing can be a self-fulfilling operation. I will relay that point to the Minister, Deputy Reilly.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 12 April 2011.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 7 Apr 2011