Topical Issue Debate

Witness Protection Programme

Deputy Dara Calleary

I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for allowing me to raise this issue. Anybody who has not lost a child cannot imagine the grief that Steve and Carmel Collins and their family have gone through following the murder of their son, Roy. To have this grief added to by being forced to leave their city and country because of being afraid to remain is unimaginable. I acknowledge the work done by the Garda on this case over many years and the efforts made to try to avoid this.

The witness protection programme seems to have failed in this instance. While results were achieved, if the family is forced to leave the country is there a danger a signal will go out and other people who would want to co-operate with the Garda will not do so. I acknowledge the Minister's statements on this to date but we need to stand back and look at how we enforce the programme and examine whether further powers are necessary for the Garda to enforce and sustain the programme to ensure nobody else will be afraid of coming forward out of fear of having to leave the country.

The thought the State has paid €50,000 to a member of the McCarthy Dundon gang for a home will horrify many people, particularly in light of the news we received this week about the Collins family having to leave the country. The Limerick regeneration agencies paid this money because of the overall aims of the project. However, given the involvement of the gang in sustained crime throughout Limerick and the mid-west region it is the wrong signal to send out.

In his response, will the Minister confirm the status of the witness protection programme? How many people are involved in it on a macro level? We do not need the details. Will the Minister confirm whether it has been affected by the budget cuts to the Garda this year? What are the specific effects on the day-to-day running of the programme? Is the Minister aware of any other family involved in the programme which is being forced to leave the country on the basis of involvement in the programme?

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter)

I listened with interest to the Deputy's contribution. He obviously substantially misunderstands the concept of a witness protection programme. Witness protection programmes worldwide are devised to facilitate individuals who are at risk from organised crime to start their lives anew, in a different location in the same country or in another country, for their own protection. Witness protection programmes are not simply about providing Garda protection for families or individuals placed at risk in their own communities. It is utterly and completely wrong for the Deputy to suggest in any shape or form that the witness protection programme has failed or that it has in any way been impacted by any cutbacks of any description.

Since my appointment as Minister, I have been determined that the State should do everything it could to assist Mr. Steve Collins and his family. Primarily, Mr. Collins and his family stood by the institutions of this State. They paid a dreadful price for the courage which they showed, courage for which all of us in this House salute them. It is vital that the State is seen to stand by them. However, despite the great progress which the Garda has made in tackling the gangs in Limerick, it remained necessary for Mr. Collins and members of his family to have intensive Garda protection.

For some considerable time, there had been contact with Mr. Collins as to how the State could best assist him and his family. This culminated in Mr. Collins deciding that the best hope for himself and his family to lead a better life is to move abroad. It has never been the practice to comment on who may or may not be in the witness security programme and the House will appreciate that, for security reasons, it would not be appropriate for me to comment in detail on any of the arrangements made for Mr. Collins and his family's move abroad. However, I assure the House that the State has offered, and is providing, every assistance possible in giving effect to that decision. Of course, I regret that Mr. Collins has had to take this decision but I fully understand it and I am sure all right thinking people will wish him and his family well in their move and in their new life.

The Garda is determined to maintain a robust response to criminal gangs. I am determined to do everything I can as Minister to support the Garda in its efforts. We should remember that, week in week out, the Garda successfully brings people involved in gangland activities before the courts and secures convictions, and a substantial number of people are serving prison sentences. Garda detection rates for murder and manslaughter cases are high, with provisional figures indicating a detection rate of more than 80% for murders last year.

The Garda Commissioner has assured me that policing in Limerick and actions to deal with gangland crime will continue to be an absolute priority for the force. I am advised by the Garda Commissioner that more than 20 gang leaders and a total of 106 individuals related to Limerick criminal gangs are in prison at this time. In addition a significant number of gang leaders are awaiting trial at present. Considerable resources will continue to be put into containing and pursuing criminal gangs in Limerick. An additional 105 gardaí have been deployed to Limerick since December 2006, bringing the total strength there to 637 at the end of 2011 - the highest number of gardaí ever deployed in the Limerick division.

The Criminal Assets Bureau is also pursuing the assets of these gangs. The bureau is central to tackling gangland crime and has had considerable success in recovering proceeds of crime. A review of the proceeds of crime legislation underpinning its operation is continuing, with a view to finalising proposals which will give effect to the commitment in the programme for Government to strengthen further the bureau's powers to seize the proceeds of crime.

The Deputy will be aware that the witness security programme is a vital part of the Garda response to tackling gangland crime. He will appreciate, however, that for security reasons it would not be appropriate for me to comment in any detail on its operation or to respond to some of the queries he raised. The House will appreciate that programmes of this nature are operated by many countries which have to confront the realities of organised crime. While I cannot, as I say, go into any detail about its operation, I assure the House that we are determined to do what is necessary to operate an effective security programme. This programme involves not only providing, where required, intensive security to individuals at risk in their communities but also, where necessary, facilitating individuals and their families to relocate to other jurisdictions.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I accept and fully support the programme. However, it is not only me who is expressing concerns about it. I direct the Minister to the remarks of the former Director of Public Prosecutions who said in 2009 it was of limited use in tackling organised crime. Has the Minister reviewed those remarks and has he internally within the Garda Síochána made changes to the programme? The Minister must admit that what happened this week, in terms of the publicity surrounding this family having to leave the country, has been damaging to the programme. There are people who want to get involved in the programme and to support its objectives but who do not wish to leave the country.

In raising this issue, I hoped to hear from the Minister what is in place to repair that damage and if there is anything we can do to make the programme more effective to ensure what happened does not have to happen again. I accept that some people will have to leave the country but the Minister must admit that the circumstances of this particular case, in terms of the bravery of the Collins family having to take the decision to leave this country, is damaging to the programme.

Deputy Alan Shatter

It is unfortunate that Deputy Calleary should attempt to play crass party-political politics with a serious programme designed to protect individuals in circumstances in which this State and this Government has provided essential assistance to the Collins family to facilitate their relocating abroad.

The Deputy stated that in 2009 the Director of Public Prosecutions described the programme as being of little or limited use.

Deputy Dara Calleary

Limited use.

Deputy Alan Shatter

The Deputy might recall that his party was in government in 2009-----

Deputy Dara Calleary

Yes. We put the gardaí in Limerick.

Deputy Alan Shatter

-----and that former Minister, Dermot Ahern, not I, was Minister for Justice. If the Deputy had any concerns about he efficacy of the programme he had two years during which time his party was in government to raise them directly with his ministerial colleague. Under this Government, there is an effective programme. The Deputy's comments today are damaging. He might reflect on that. The very essence of witness protection programmes is not only to provide intensive security for families within their locality but to assist those families, who have assisted the State in bringing to justice those engaged in organised crime, who wish to lead their lives free of that intensive security to relocate should they wish to do so.

While the Deputy may not understand that, my predecessor did. The arrangements put in place in regard to the Collins family commenced with discussions in which the former Minister, Dermot Ahern, was engaged. I substantially advanced those discussions and brought arrangements that were taking far too long to fruition and finality, thus facilitating the Collins family in their wish and choice to relocate elsewhere so they can lead a normal life. I wish them well. It is a disgrace that the Deputy should use the successful implementation of the witness protection programme and the bravery of the Collins family in terms of their freely made decision to relocate elsewhere when we would have continued to provide them with extensive security in this State for crass party-political point scoring.

Poolbeg Incinerator

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

It is 15 years since the Poolbeg incinerator was proposed. This saga has run for the same length of time as did the Mahon tribunal. For 15 years a local community has feared construction of this incinerator. The contract was at review stage up to end February. This was further extended to 31 August. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd, will be aware that €80 million has already been spent on this project, which equates to approximately €5 million per annum since it was first proposed by Dublin City Council. A further €9 million was spent this year on the purchase of land and additional consultation fees.

I welcome the news that the local government audit service will provide a full report of the cost exposure to the Committee of Public Accounts. However, this is too little too late. The money has been spent and a bad contract remains in place. The original contract was for construction of 600,000 tonne incinerator, which is too big for current and projected needs. According to the Hennessy report, a put or pay clause means that Dublin City Council must provide 320 tonnes per year to the incinerator or face fines of €350 million. This has left citizens of this country exposed to fines for a contract from which they, through their democratically elected representatives, were shut out while public servants tried to cover their past mistakes through changes to the law. The council can no longer deliver waste to this monster and thus changes to the law to end side-by-side competition and make the council the owner of the waste stream, which is constitutionally dubious, have been proposed. This uncertainty is putting private sector jobs at risk. Rather than continue to jump through hoops we should scrap the project and bring certainty to the waste market.

I welcome the move by Mr. Joseph McCarthy and Ms Valerie Jenkins to file a complaint about this contract with the EU Commission. It is clear that Dublin City Council has breached EU public procurement in terms of its awarding of the contract on the Poolbeg Peninsula to Covanta Energy. Mr. McCarthy also highlighted the waste in respect of the voting machines but was not listened to. He has undertaken extensive research in respect of this incinerator. Whether we can continue with this incinerator is highly questionable. Former Minister, Mr. Roche, signed the contract for this incinerator before he left office. To his credit former Minister, John Gormley, did his best to prevent it going ahead.

I know the Minister of State has with him a well prepared script from the Department. I ask that he request the Minister to re-examine this contract, which is not working and will result in great cost to the taxpayer. I ask also that he ensure the Minister is not captured by his civil servants and re-examines this contract over the coming weeks. The opportunity exists to prevent further costs to the taxpayer.

Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Fergus O’Dowd)

I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan.

The Poolbeg project is provided for in the Dublin regional waste management plan for which the four Dublin local authorities have statutory responsibility under the Waste Management Acts. The facility is being advanced by Dublin City Council, acting on behalf of the Dublin local authorities by way of a public private partnership with Dublin Waste to Energy Ltd, a joint venture of Covanta Energy and DONG Energy Generation A/S Denmark.

The project received planning approval from An Bord Pleanála in November 2007 and was granted a waste license from the EPA in December 2008. The facility is intended to recover energy from residual waste and is to have a capacity of 600,000 tonnes per annum. In accordance with the provisions of the Waste Management Acts, the preparation and adoption of a waste management plan, including in respect of infrastructure provision, is the statutory responsibility of the local authority or authorities concerned and under section 60(3) of the Act the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government is precluded from exercising any power or control in relation to the performance by a local authority, in particular circumstances, of a statutory function vested in it.

Mr. John Hennessy, SC, was appointed under section 224 of the Local Government Act 2001 as an authorised person to examine potential financial risks associated with the Poolbeg project within a given set of scenarios. Mr. Hennessy had access to a full range of commercial documents. In June 2011, the Minister published the report prepared by Mr. Hennessy on the Poolbeg project. He did so to ensure that as much information as possible is available to the public, while respecting the confidential nature of information provided to Mr. Hennessy to compile his report. The report, as published, was, therefore, redacted to protect commercially sensitive information. At the time of publication I indicated that much had changed since the report was commissioned and that there will be further changes as he finalises a new waste policy. Mr. Hennessy provided a very good report but was working within a set of scenarios which had been narrowly defined for him, which somewhat restricted the applicability of the report. Having consulted Government colleagues, the Minister concluded that there was no national waste policy justification for intervening in the matter and that decisions in regard to the project are a matter for the two parties to the contract, Dublin City Council and Covanta Limited.

The Minister understands that the parties to the contract in respect of the Poolbeg facility are in a period of review. Queries concerning the status of discussions, contract terms and costs of the project should be directed to the city council and its partners in the project.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

I am sorry the same old answer has come from the Department. I accept that much has changed since this project was conceived 15 years ago. We are in a period of review. The local authorities cannot be allowed to run on this issue. Much has changed. The Environmental Protection Agency's report on the waste market shows the national waste recycling rate is 40%. It is 46% in the Dublin region. Since 2009, the volume of waste going to landfill has decreased by 13%. It is estimated that there is enough landfill capacity for 12 years. Therefore, no urgency is associated with the Poolbeg incinerator. Equally, the required volume to feed it is not available. Over 650,000 tonnes of private waste recovery infrastructure has come on line in the last two or three years. That exceeds the tonnage of the Poolbeg project.

According to the SLR Consulting report that was compiled on behalf of the Irish Waste Management Association, we will comfortably reach our 2013 and 2016 targets for the diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill. The argument that has always been made is that we will not be able to reach our targets and will therefore face enormous European Union fines. The opposite is the case. We are reaching our targets comfortably. We have rolled out brown bins to 50% of households in Dublin. The national rate of recovery of such waste increased by 3% in 2011. Approximately 900,000 tonnes of waste that currently goes to landfill is capable of being composted. A much better use of money would be to encourage re-use, rather than incineration.

If we have to face EU fines, as we are always being warned about, they will be dwarfed by the substantial and unnecessary waste of money on the Poolbeg project and by the fines that will potentially result from the pay-out clause. I remind the Minister of State that the Hennessy report suggested that the fines could amount to up to €350 million. It is clear that private waste contractors will challenge any attempt to place the ownership of the waste stream in the hands of the council. In every place where side-by-side competition has been replaced by tendered routes, it has resulted in a less efficient and more expensive service for our home owners. We are constantly getting set-piece answers from the Department. I ask the Minister of State to re-examine the figures. We are opening up a huge potential cost to the taxpayer at a time when money is tight.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are over time.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

I appreciate that an important announcement is expected. I conclude by emphasising that this needs to be reviewed at a national level.

Deputy Fergus O’Dowd

I will bring the Deputy's comments to the attention of the Minister, Deputy Hogan. The programme for Government includes a commitment to introduce competitive tendering for household waste collection whereby service providers will bid to provide waste collection services in a given area for a given period of time and to a guaranteed level of service. The approach to the future regulation of the household waste collection market will be carefully considered by the Minister, Deputy Hogan, and his Government colleagues. It will take account of the full range of economic, environmental and other relevant issues. It will also take account of the many perspectives offered by consultants. I emphasise that in considering the regulation of household waste collection, the Minister, Deputy Hogan, will be mindful of a set of factors, including economic and environmental issues, the need for realistic and workable policy options and, critically, the availability and desirability or otherwise of various options.

These issues are not without a degree of complexity. It is not a simple matter of comparing costs. Household waste collection services are of critical importance. Wider issues of market stability and industry sustainability must be considered. The programme for Government contains a commitment to develop a coherent national waste policy that adheres to the waste hierarchy. The policy will aim to minimise waste disposal in landfill and maximise recovery. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, is prioritising this commitment and is anxious to provide early regulatory certainty. He expects to be in a position to submit final proposals on national waste policy, including the regulation of the market, in the coming weeks. The new policy will not be driven by any particular project, technology or interest group - it will be driven by what the Government judges to be in the best interests of the country.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 29 Mar 2012