Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Oct 2011

Vol. 745 No. 1

Topical Issue Debate

Daylight Saving Time

Deputy David Stanton

I thank the office of the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this topical issue, which is quite topical because shortly we will change our clocks resulting in far darker evenings. It will be quite noticeable that winter has arrived with a vengeance. My proposal is that we examine this matter. I have been calling for this for a number of years, as has Senator Feargal Quinn and others. This matter is under the remit of the Minister for Justice and Equality, which dates from the association with the Home Office in Britain, going back to when changes in clocks were first introduced in 1916 to allow farmers to work in the fields.

There are many benefits to considering this issue. In the United States, they have changed the daylight saving arrangements such that summer time rules will be in effect for an additional four weeks. A report from the US Department of Energy found that enough energy was saved to power 100,000 homes for over a year. There was also a decline in road accidents and pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Multiple investigations in the UK have also revealed benefits to changing summer time arrangements. In an experiment between 1968 and 1971, all clocks in the country remained at GMT plus one hour, resulting in a 3% reduction in the number of road deaths. Although there was an increase in Scotland because of darker mornings, overall 40 fewer people were killed or injured each year. Estimates also show that the move will boost tourism and create extra jobs, as well as reducing carbon emissions and energy consumption. The Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security of the last Dáil called for Ireland to adopt summer time all year round. If we implemented double summer time, we would improve business because we would be in line with the opening hours of businesses in the other 25 EU countries. There are many benefits to this measure, including improving road safety, reducing energy consumption, a reduction in crime, allowing children more time to play in the evenings and a reduction in obesity levels. I call on the Minister and the Government to initiate a discussion on the matter at EU level. All EU Governments must agree on this point. Last year, David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, raised this as an issue and his predecessor, Gordon Brown, had suggested a three-year trial period. This is a topical issue at this time of year as we are about to change times.

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter)

I thank the Deputy for the opportunity to make a statement on this matter. I understand that it is an issue in which he has a keen personal interest. Our present time arrangements allow for summer time to begin at 1 a.m. GMT on the last Sunday in March and to end at 1 a.m. on the last Sunday in October every year. These arrangements are set out in the Winter Time Order 2001. This order gives effect to European Union Directive 2000/84/EC of 19 January 2001. As a result, all ED member states start summer time simultaneously. Consequently, time differences between member states remain constant throughout the year. Were we to consider extending summer time, and subsequently hoping to introduce such a change we would first have to convince all 26 other EU member states to do likewise in order that time differences between member states remain constant throughout the year.

In this regard I remind the Deputy that in accordance with EU Directive 200/84/EC my Department, in common with other member states and following consultations with other Departments and semi-State bodies, made submissions to the European Commission in July 2007 on our current time arrangements. The European Commission subsequently reported that it took the view that the analysis set out in the proposal for EU Directive 2000/84/EC remained valid and that no member state had expressed a wish to abandon summer time or change the provisions of the current directive.

In considering any potential changes to our current time arrangements I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that we must consider what is happening in the UK, not least because we have same time arrangements, they are our biggest trading partner and we share a border with Northern Ireland. A Private Members' Bill, the Daylight Saving Bill, passed its Second Reading in the UK House of Commons on 3 December 2010. If this Bill became law, the British Government would be required to conduct a cross-departmental analysis of the potential costs and benefits of the advancing time by one hour for all, or part of, the year. I understand that such analysis would include a breakdown, so far as possible, of the costs and benefits for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. In light of this, I would expect that each of the devolved Administrations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland would ensure that their views and concerns would be fully reflected in any analysis that might be conducted.

If this cost benefit analysis is to be conducted, the Bill requires that an independent commission be established to assess it. If that commission concludes that the advancing of time by one hour for all, or part of, the year would be beneficial to England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland then an order bringing the commission's recommendations into effect for a three-year trial period would need to be made. Given that European Union Directive 2000/84/EC results in all member states starting and ending summertime simultaneously in order that time differences between them remain constant throughout the year, this would impose a limitation on the discretion available in this area. In advance of the Second Reading of the Daylight Savings Bill, Mr. Edward Davey, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, sought a meeting with Ireland's ambassador in London to discuss issues of concern. This meeting took place in November 2010.

My Department is keeping a watching brief in regard to the passage of this Bill. Officials from my Department met the Bill's sponsor, Ms Rebecca Harris, MP, in February of this year for the purpose of finding out more about the background to her Bill and registering an interest in its passage through the House of Commons in respect of any implications it might have for this country. However, no discussions on this matter have taken place to date with our European colleagues as the matter is not at a sufficiently advanced stage at Westminster.

I have no plans at this time to change the current time zone arrangements or to conduct an analysis of extending summertime. It is an issue to which the Deputy might give further consideration in his capacity as Chairman of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality.

Deputy David Stanton

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. The Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality will consider discussing this matter, in which case we will seek the co-operation of the Minister and his officials. Does the Minister see any merit in the proposal?

Deputy Alan Shatter

I would welcome the committee engaging with this issue. It would be helpful if it advanced the initial discussions in which an official of my Department engaged with the sponsor of the Bill in the House of Commons. The issue is complex. First, it is in our interest that our time zone remain the same as that of Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom. It would give rise to considerable unnecessary difficulties if that were to change. Second, there is an added complexity should, for example, the United Kingdom and Ireland agree to the change in their respective jurisdictions. There are benefits to be derived from such change but there is also the difficulty of bringing other European Union member states along with us. Consideration must be given to how such a change would affect the interaction between the different time zones, specifically between this island and our neighbouring island and between this island and the main Continent of Europe.

Nevertheless, difficulties surrounding an issue are never a reason for not looking into it further. There would be value in the matter being pursued through the committee which is so ably chaired by the Deputy.

EU Funding

Deputy Pearse Doherty

In June 2010 the former Government applied for €41 million from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in order to provide tailored retraining for 9,000 named construction workers who were made redundant between June 2009 and March 2010. Moneys from this fund must be used within 24 months of the initial application. In other member states it is standard practice that national funds are used in advance to provide early intervention for workers and to ensure spending targets are met.

According to the European Commission, €35 million has been approved to provide support for 5,987 redundant construction workers. However, final approval is not likely until the end of the year, leaving just six months before all moneys must be spent. I have been reliably informed that a significant portion of this funding is now in jeopardy as a result of mismanagement of the programme. Only those redundant workers named in the application can avail of the funding, yet I am told that very few, if any at all, of the named individuals were contacted and that it is not now known whether they are still in the country, have emigrated in search of work or are in work. Will the Minister indicate whether this is the case? I am told that none of these individuals has had his or her training needs assessed beyond the basic assessment provided by FÁS for all redundant workers, even though a more detailed assessment is required for the specific forms of support provided under the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. Will the Minister clarify this?

Earlier this month the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Ciarán Cannon, stated that at least €22 million of the total value of the programme has already been invested in training supports delivered by FÁS. Was this sum used to provide additional tailored training over and above the existing FÁS training for the 5,987 individuals named in the globalisation fund application, or was it part of the ordinary spend by FÁS on training that would have been provided in any case had the globalisation funding not been sought?

Concerns have also been raised with me regarding the time period used in determining eligibility for inclusion in the scheme. With more than 140,000 construction workers made redundant in recent years, why was the application restricted only to those who lost their jobs between July 2009 and March 2010? Why has no application been made for other sectors affected by the recession, such as the retail and financial sectors, given that this fund has an annual budget of some €500 million, 80% of which remains untouched in any given year?

While numerous issues require to be clarified in regard to this matter, the central issue of concern is the possible loss of a large portion of the €35 million in European funds for retraining of redundant workers. Will the Minister confirm whether there is any risk of this money being lost and, if so, what he and his officials are doing to prevent such an occurrence?

Minister for Education and Skills (Deputy Ruairí Quinn)

I thank Deputy Doherty for affording me the opportunity to speak on this important issue. I am not certain whether I have full answers to all of his questions, but I will follow up with subsequent information if necessary.

Ireland has an enviable record in the EU in sourcing European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, EGF, co-financing assistance to support redundant workers. To date, €38.2 million in EGF funding — national and EU — has been secured for EGF programmes to support redundant workers from Dell, Waterford Crystal and SR Technics and ancillary enterprises. A further €55 million is in prospect, with the European Commission recently approving €35.7 million, or 65% of this amount, in support of almost 9,000 redundant construction workers. This combined EGF expenditure has and will provide supports to more than 13,500 redundant workers.

EGF funding assists the Government to provide a package of personalised services in the areas of guidance, training, educational opportunities and enterprise supports. A mix of existing and new and innovative measures has been designed and implemented in the various programmes. As well as co-financing guidance, training, further and third level education provided by the core service providers such as FÁS, the VECs and the publicly funded third level colleges and institutions, EGF funds have also funded courses provided by the private sector. Innovative internship programmes have been designed and operated in the mid-west region in support of redundant Dell workers, while tailored FÁS and VEC vocational and community employment courses have been deployed for Waterford Crystal workers. An innovative FÁS apprenticeship scheme for redundant SR Technics apprentices is running in conjunction with the Air Corps and the Department of Defence.

In regard to the three EGF applications in support of almost 9,000 redundant construction workers, full approval of these applications is still awaited from the European Council and European Parliament. However, the Government has been providing supports to these workers since the date of their redundancy. These supports have included guidance, training, further education courses, on and off-the-job apprenticeship supports, third level education programmes and enterprise start-up advisory and financial supports. To date we estimate that supports totalling €22 million have been delivered to the relevant construction sector applicants. A further suite of guidance, training and upskilling proposals is under consideration and all persons eligible for new supports will be contacted individually next month. Following the take-up of all available supports, a further suite of measures will be provided in 2012 to maximise the anticipated EGF funding.

The three completed EGF programmes are currently being assessed and wound up, and final reports must be prepared for submission to the European Commission. The first such report is for the Dell EGF programme. As a number of significant claims are currently being processed and others are still due from service providers, it is not possible to give a total expenditure figure at this time. However, my Department has paid more than €5.5 million in funding to date, based on claims received, with a further €1.4 million and just under €1 million, respectively, paid out in regard to the Waterford Crystal and SR Technics EGF programmes, which closed subsequent to the Dell programme.

Deputy Pearse Doherty

The application and administration of these funds is a shambles. The Minister confirmed that the 5,987 construction workers under whose name an application was made will be contacted by the Department next month.

This is 17 months after the application for specific tailor-made programmes to help them get back into work was made for them. These are early interventions yet they will only be informed 17 months after the application is made. That is a delay of seven months. The €35 million will be spent on their behalf. I know that is not solely the problem of the Labour Party or Fine Gael in that the previous Government administered this fund for the majority of that time but it is not right that this has happened. It happened with SR Technics, Dell and Waterford Crystal.

While the Minister may not have the detail at hand does he believe that significant portions of the funding drawn down for retraining for the persons who lost their jobs in those three companies will have to be sent back to Europe as a result of the criteria and the way it was administered by the previous Government, particularly that the money was not spent until the cheque landed with the Department? What is required under this fund, and what happens in other member states, is that the Government uses its national funds to apply early interventions in the form of tailor-made programmes but that has not happened. Can the Minister confirm whether his Department knows of the whereabouts of the 5,900 individuals on whose behalf this application has been made? On whom can this money be spent? I suggest it is nobody other than those individuals. Can the Minister confirm that?

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

I share with the Deputy my concern about the maladministration of this set of programmes by the previous Administration. I will be honest with the Deputy. It is not a satisfactory situation. I am not sure what precisely we can do at this point in time but we have certainly missed one tide in regard to it and I hope we have not missed the whole tide. I apologise to the workers involved. They have been victims of maladministration by the Department under the previous Administration. It is now our responsibility to try to clear it up. I do not know how much we can clear up but when I do know, I will tell the Deputy.

Minority Faith Schools

Deputy Shane Ross

This is an issue which has come up on several occasions in recent budgets because of the fears of minority religions that the education of pupils in their particular ethos has been threatened by budget cuts or other cuts in the past. The Minister will be aware that their fears were realised by his predecessor, Batt O'Keeffe, not very long ago.

At this time of year it is appropriate that representatives in this House should at least put in a plea that in the incoming budget, although I do not expect the Minister to give me any assurances on that, the ethos of minority religions will be protected. It might be helpful if I reminded the Minister that this issue was raised in the previous Dáil by no less a person than the then Deputy Enda Kenny and Deputy Brian Hayes in support of the plea I make now. It was also supported at the time these funds were threatened by Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, who supported the right of minority faiths to educate their own flock in their own ethos.

I ask the Minister to bear in mind when the budget discussions come up that there should be no further cuts in the budget for minority schools. It is not just Protestants who believe that. Other minority schools believe this is a right which should not be threatened. There are many fears among Protestant schools that they will have to close if their funding is cut any further. The evidence for that is obvious because the tradition of paying special grants to minority schools was guaranteed originally by the then Minister for Education and one of the Minister's predecessors, Donogh O'Malley, who in 1967 gave this pledge which, unfortunately, has now been broken.

One of the reasons minority schools need a grant which differentiates them from the normal schools here is because of their need to establish boarding schools. Boarding schools by their very nature are much more expensive and the reason for the pupils attending boarding schools is obvious. As a minority with small numbers they are spread-eagled geographically and a school that is suitable for their education must be located in an area which they can all attend rather than only a few of them attending.

In view of the fact that further cuts would be threatening to their ethos and reduce pupil-teacher ratios, and that they are suggesting that schools may have to close if there are further cuts, and given also that they are already stretched, will the Minister consider favourably a plea that their ethos will be protected and that there should be no further financial stringency imposed upon them?

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

I assume the Deputy is referring to the withdrawal of certain funding from minority faith schools with effect from 1 January 2009, which realised an annual saving of €2.8 million to the Exchequer. The grant was withdrawn due to real concerns about the constitutionality of making it available to fee-charging schools of one ethos and not to those of another.

As these schools no longer receive funding, the question of a further cut does not arise. The Deputy will appreciate that in advance of any decisions by the Government in the context of the upcoming budget, as he mentioned, he does not expect to nor am I at liberty to speculate on measures that may be announced.

There are 26 distinctively Protestant schools and one Jewish school. Of these schools, the Jewish school and 20 of the Protestant schools charge fees. Many of the schools have a boarding facility, reflecting the dispersed nature of the communities across the country. The six Protestant schools within the free education scheme receive the same funding as all other schools within the free education system.

This Government recognises the importance of ensuring that students from a Protestant or reformed church background can attend a school that reflects their denominational ethos while at the same time ensuring that funding arrangements are in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. I remind the Deputy that the Constitution specifically states that the State shall not discriminate against one religion in favour of another.

With regard to the fee-charging Protestant schools, an arrangement exists whereby funding is paid to the Secondary Education Committee, an organisation run by the churches involved in running the schools. The Secondary Education Committee then disburses funds to the Protestant fee-charging schools on behalf of pupils who would otherwise have difficulty with the cost of boarding fees and who, in the absence of such financial support, would be unable to attend a second level school of a reformed church or Protestant ethos. Funding amounts to €6.5 million annually. Arrangements are in place for the Jewish school also.

There are no changes proposed in respect of the Protestant block grant. Teachers in all fee-charging schools are paid by the State. This arrangement pre-dated the introduction of free education arrangements and has existed since the foundation of the State and predates the foundation of the State. The estimated cost of these posts in 2011 is of the order of €100 million. I am already on record as saying that this is not a simple matter as these arrangements, which are historic and of long standing, impact upon a substantial number of schools which cater for religious minorities.

Deputy Shane Ross

I thank the Minister for his response. I ask him to elaborate on his statement that there are no changes proposed in respect of the Protestant block grant. Does that mean there will be none? Is that a pledge or just the current position? In other words, does that mean it will not happen and that we can reassure the Protestant community and those of a different ethos that this will not happen in the foreseeable future?

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

As the Deputy would be aware, this country has lost its economic sovereignty. We are under a programme of restructuring. We are required to extract from the public expenditure side of our equation a sum of the order of €3.63 billion plus for the coming fiscal year, 2012.

Deputy Shane Ross

It is €4 billion.

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

That is the Deputy's educated estimate. I will stick to the brief I have. That money will be a mixture of expenditure reduction and changes in taxation, and decisions on those matters have not yet been finalised. They are under active discussion.

The Department of Education and Skills is one of the big spending Departments along with the Department of Health and the Department of Social Protection, so I must look at areas in which I can reduce expenditure in a prudent and responsible way. I am aware of the deep concerns within the Protestant or Reformed Church community about possible additional reductions which would have a disproportionate impact on their school infrastructure. I have met some people about the matter and Deputies on all sides of the House have been contacted about it. There are real concerns on the part of people who have expressed them about what could possibly happen to schools of their ethos. I am highly sensitive to their concerns.

Summer Works Scheme

Deputy Brendan Smith

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for accepting this item for discussion this afternoon and I appreciate the attendance of the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, to respond to it.

I sought this debate due to the urgency of the issue. The principal and secretary of the board of management of St. Mary's boys national school in Belturbet, Mr. Padraig Martin, has appealed the decision of the Department to turn down the summer works scheme 2011 application submitted by the school. In the appeal Mr. Martin clearly outlines that the application met with the criteria of the scheme. The application is for the provision of appropriate toilet facilities.

Section 2 of the summer works scheme 2011 states that an application for toilet facilities is allowable. In addition, the proposed project is of an urgent and priority nature, which is covered by section 1 of the scheme. It is clear from the school's correspondence to the Department that the overcrowded and generally unsuitable condition of the current facilities is a cause of concern to the staff, the board of management and the parents on health and safety grounds. It also causes disruption to routine school day activities.

It has been pointed out to the Department that the parents of special needs pupils have, understandably, conveyed to the board of management and the staff their unhappiness and concern about the lack of toilet facilities for the disabled. This necessitates children with special needs being attended to by female special needs assistants in conditions that are not near satisfactory. There are 76 pupils in St. Mary's boys national school, nine of whom have a diagnosis of a physical, sensory or emotional behavioural nature. Four of these children require the assistance of a special needs assistant for toilet and self-care issues. Occasionally, a child might need to have clothing changed. Proper facilities would enable the needs of children to be cared for in a manner that protects the child's dignity and privacy.

The senior paediatric occupational therapist in the HSE in the Cavan area has clearly stated, in supporting correspondence submitted with the appeal, that there is an urgent need to have proper and modern toilet facilities provided at the school. In addition, local health nurses have outlined their concerns about the current situation. Those nurses are very familiar with the requirements of the pupils in the school, particularly the children with special needs.

The comprehensive appeal submitted to the Department contained the reasoned and considered views of the board of management, the principal and staff, the parent body and local health professionals. I appeal to the Minister to have this appeal designated as a priority in his Department for finalisation and approval at an early date.

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. St. Mary's boys national school, Belturbet, County Cavan, applied to the Department of Education and Skills under the 2011 summer works scheme to construct a new flat roof extension to contain four additional toilets and a new disabled toilet of solid block construction with an asphalt concrete roof. The school has a staffing level of three teachers and an enrolment of 76 pupils.

The summer works scheme, SWS, covers projects in school buildings such as gas, electrical and mechanical works, roof replacements and repairs, window replacement, toilet upgrades, access works and structural improvements that, ideally, can be delivered during the summer months. Due to the scale of demand for funding under the 2011 summer works scheme, it was not possible to grant aid all applications. As outlined in the circular governing the operation of the scheme, applications for works in the higher categories of eligible works, that is, gas, electrical and mechanical works, were prioritised for funding. It simply was not possible to include St. Mary's boys national school in the list of 453 successful schools that benefited from the €41.2 million that was available under the scheme. A letter to this effect issued to the school on 12 April 2011.

As part of the Government's jobs initiative, €40 million in funding was made available for building works in an additional 374 schools, details of which were announced in May 2011. These funds allowed school projects such as for special needs access, improvement works to toilet facilities, roof works and window replacements, submitted under the 2011 summer works scheme to be considered further. In other words, we used the original list of applications to award an additional 374 schools with an additional sum of €40 million.

The application from St. Mary's boys school for toilet facilities was considered under the jobs initiative. The technicality was that it involved the construction of a new building and this disqualified it. The summer works scheme and the jobs initiative applied to improvements, repairs or additions to existing structures. I am prepared to look at the appeal that has been received and hope to get a response to the Deputy as quickly as possible.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I appreciate the Minister's concerns about this application. This school has a higher than usual number of children with special needs so those concerns exist for all of us. I am aware from my constituency and elsewhere that the summer works scheme has been exceptionally successful.

However, there is a contradiction in the terms of the scheme. Section 2 states that an application for toilet facilities is allowable and section 1 refers to a project of an urgent and priority nature. Being familiar with public administration, I believe that within a scheme there is scope to cater for exceptional circumstances and this project is deemed urgent and a priority by the school staff, the principal, the board of management, the parent body and the local health professionals. The community in Belturbet would not urgently seek an investment unless it was necessary. A small investment would bring great benefit to the school-going population and the staff of St. Mary's boys national school. I hope the Minister will request that his officials finalise the application.

Many parents called my office about this and I called them back over the weekend. They are very concerned about the inadequacy of the poor toilet facilities. The number of special needs children in the school at present gives extra urgency to the case. Everybody involved with the school is anxious that the Minister consult directly with his officials on this issue, if possible, and that there be a successful outcome. A relatively small amount of investment will bring great benefits to so many children.

Deputy Ruairí Quinn

I share the Deputy's concern in this matter. I will take a personal interest in the appeal process.

Deputy Brendan Smith

I thank the Minister.