Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 12 Dec 2012

Vol. 786 No. 2

Topical Issue Debate

Report on Murder of Pat Finucane

Deputy Micheál Martin

Today's release of the de Silva report and the British Prime Minister's statement on the shocking level of State collusion in the brutal murder of Pat Finucane opens up a dark chapter in our country's history. The report, however, does not meet the fair, objective criteria of a full investigation into the murder. The Finucane family has completely rejected the report as a whitewash and has consistently argued that a public inquiry, where the veracity of documents and witnesses can be tested under legal cross examination in the eyes of the public, is the only way of getting to the truth about the depth and reach of security force collusion. Today's report simply does not meet those hopes.

I fundamentally disagree with Mr. Cameron's ongoing refusal to hold an independent review. Contrary to his statement today, I believe that it would reveal a fuller picture of what happened in those dark days and I call on the Government to reiterate its support for a full independent inquiry and to relay same to the British Government. Furthermore, it is vital that we in Dáil Éireann put aside time to discuss the de Silva report as part of our own commitment to the peace process. That process, as we have seen all too clearly in recent days, is more fragile and incomplete than we might like to think. We cannot allow Northern Ireland to be neglected in this House and I hope the past few days have scotched any complacency seeping into Government circles on the issue.

Today we saw the long-awaited release of a report into a victim of brutal State collusion. It is important to also take this moment to remember the pain and suffering endured by thousands of families across Northern Ireland who were victims of the Troubles and whose search for the truth, on many occasions, has met with little notice. Earlier this month I received a letter from the father of one of the so-called "disappeared". His life is utterly shattered by the unfathomable blow to his family. As we seek justice for the family of Pat Finucane, those thousands of stories of unresolved loss should not be forgotten by any Member of the House.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I wish to commend the family of Pat Finucane on their courage and diligence in demanding a public inquiry into his killing. I want to be very mindful of all those who have died or been injured as a result of the conflict, regardless of who the perpetrators were.

The de Silva review into Pat Finucane's death in February 1989 concludes that there was no overarching state conspiracy but accepts there was collusion by British state agencies. It could not have done otherwise. The review is not acceptable to Pat's family who have described it as a sham and a whitewash. It is not acceptable to Sinn Féin. Three members of our party were killed during the period in question, as well as 11 family members of party activists. Today David Cameron sought to use the review as a pretext for denying the family a public inquiry.

The report reveals some of the extent to which there was collusion, but it does not diminish the need for a public inquiry. On the contrary, it makes such an inquiry more necessary than ever. Collusion was a matter of institutional and administrative practice by successive British Governments. It involved the establishment of Unionist paramilitary groups, the systematic infiltration by British agencies of all Unionist death squads at the highest levels, the control and direction of these groups, the arming and training of their members and the provision of information on people to be killed. In Pat's case, all of those involved in the killing, from the person who ordered it to those who carried it out and provided the necessary information, worked for the British Government.

At Weston Park the British agreed with the Irish Government to invite Judge Peter Cory to determine the need for an inquiry. He concluded that an inquiry was warranted, but the British Government has refused to implement his recommendation. This is a direct repudiation of the agreement between the Government here and the Government in London. The Irish Government should have prevented this, or at least spoken out more clearly about it. The role of successive Governments in this issue has not been as helpful, strategic or consistent as it could have been. The Finucane family wants the truth and a public inquiry. The Irish Government should go beyond simply supporting the family's demand to launch a diplomatic offensive in the USA and Europe and at the United Nations to highlight British obstruction and seek international support for a public inquiry.

Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade (Deputy Eamon Gilmore)

Some 23 years ago Pat Finucane was brutally murdered by loyalist paramilitaries in front of his wife, Geraldine, and three children, Michael, Catherine and John. Geraldine has since campaigned tirelessly to get to the truth about her husband's murder. Along the way she has had to endure the frustration of seeing evidence destroyed, justice obstructed and her husband's reputation impugned. Although a very private person, she has taken on a public role and fulfilled that role with dignity and integrity. With quiet determination she has focused not only on the two men who broke into her house that Sunday evening to murder her husband but also on those behind them who orchestrated the murder. Officials from the Irish Embassy assisted Geraldine and her family in London today as they heard Prime Minister Cameron acknowledge the extent of collusion by British security forces in her husband's murder and apologise to her and her family.

Pat Finucane was one of more than 3,500 people to die during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. Every man, woman and child who died left behind relatives and friends who mourn the loss of their loved ones to this day. However, the murder of Pat Finucane stands out from most other cases in one particular and important respect. It was one of a number of cases which gave rise to allegations of collusion by the security forces in each jurisdiction and which, therefore, had profound implications for public confidence and, consequently, the wider peace process. It was not the only such case. The murders of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen, Superintendent Bob Buchanan, Lord Justice and Lady Gibson, Robert Hamill, Rosemary Nelson and Billy Wright all gave rise to concerns about collusion. It was because of their wider implications for confidence that these cases were a particular concern for the British and Irish Governments at Weston Park in 2001. Arising from their discussions, the two Governments agreed to appoint a judge of international standing from outside either jurisdiction to undertake a thorough investigation of these cases and, in the event that a public inquiry was recommended, to implement that recommendation. Following a thorough investigation of the allegations, Judge Peter Cory recommended a public inquiry into five of the six cases. On foot of his recommendation, the Smithwick tribunal was established by resolutions of Dáil and Seanad Éireann in 2005 and is continuing its work.

We should acknowledge that the Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, has shown commendable determination to get to the truth of what happened in the past and, in doing so, hold the UK state to the highest account and judge its officers by the highest standards. His apology to Mrs. Finucane continues the process of healing that he set in train so memorably with his statement to the UK Parliament on the publication in June 2010 of the Saville report on Bloody Sunday. The report published today is a lengthy one and bears close reading and serious study. The picture revealed by the Prime Minister is, as he has noted, truly shocking. I respect the frankness and honesty with which he confronted grievous failures by the British army, the RUC and ministries. This is not an easy task for the leader of a country which takes great pride in its security forces and civil service. He acknowledged the systematic leaking by security services to the UDA and paramilitary groups; the failure by the RUC to act on threat intelligence; the involvement by paid agents of the state in the murder of Pat Finucane; the systematic failure to investigate and arrest west Belfast UDA agents involved in the murder; the systematic attempts by the police and the army to disrupt and thwart investigations; and the deliberate misleading of Ministers by officials. It is a matter of public record that the Irish Government disagreed strongly with the decision by the British Government last year to conduct a review rather than an inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane and the lack of consultation in advance of that decision. Our disagreement was born of a belief that public confidence was best served by an inquiry in which the process of getting to the truth was open to scrutiny in order that the findings were put beyond doubt. We are mindful of Judge Cory's concern that, where doubts persist, myths and misconceptions may proliferate. This view was underpinned by an all-party motion passed by this House in 2006 which recalled the Weston Park agreement, took note of Judge Cory's findings on collusion, commended the Finucane family for its courageous campaign and called for the immediate establishment of a fully independent, public judicial inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane, as recommended by Judge Cory. Such an inquiry would enjoy the full co-operation of the family and the wider community throughout Ireland and abroad. We can build on the progress made today. The work undertaken by Desmond de Silva, QC, can facilitate us by showing that an inquiry need not be lengthy, open-ended or inordinately expensive.

Confidence is fundamental to the Northern Ireland peace process. As we have seen in recent days, significant challenges have yet to be tackled and we can only tackle these challenges successfully if we do so together. Close partnership between the British and Irish Governments throughout the process has been critical to sustaining confidence and supporting progress. That visible and collaborative partnership is needed today perhaps more than at any time in the recent past. There are occasions when we disagree, but we do so respectively. This is one such occasion. While we will study the report carefully, we will continue to set out why we believe the Agreements matter and public confidence is best served by a public inquiry. The Irish Government will continue to seek a public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finance, as committed to in the Agreements, and we will continue to work closely with the British Government in supporting the Executive and the Assembly as it seeks to address the difficult and polarising debate about flags.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. The report is shocking and reveals why the British Government did not want a public inquiry. The scale and depth of collusion between the RUC, the British army and the UDA and other loyalist forces are such that a public inquiry would probably reveal much more about the wider systemic nature of the collusion. In 1991 Mr. Ken Barrett, the person eventually convicted of the murder, was recruited as an agent by the RUC special branch instead of being prosecuted, which is what the RUC criminal investigative division wanted.

The Tánaiste has stated the Irish Government sought a full and open inquiry as part of the Weston Park agreement. The British Government decided instead to commission the de Silva review without consulting its Irish counterpart.

In essence, there has been a breach of an international agreement between our two countries. This matter remains a point of disagreement between the two governments, but more than that, it compounds the hurt the Finucane family has experienced as a result of the absence of an inquiry. The failure to have an inquiry will also create a lack of confidence and reduce the confidence that has developed in recent times following reports on Bloody Sunday and so on. It also undermines confidence in the relationship between the two governments, a relationship that is critical to the overall peace process.

How does the Tánaiste propose to pursue this breach of an international agreement? What is the nature of the engagement between him and the British Government with regard to pursuing a full public inquiry into this particular murder? What steps does he propose to take to bring this about and to get the British Government to fulfil its part of the agreement?

Deputy Gerry Adams

No more than anybody else here, I have not read the full report. However, I was briefed on it by Paul Maskey, one of our MPs, who went to London and had prepublication notice of the report. Let us not mess about with this. I commend to the Taoiseach and to every Teachta Dála here the book written by Frank Kitson which deals with counterinsurgency operations in some detail. To paraphrase him, he says the law should be a weapon to get rid of unwanted members of the public. He set up counter gangs. They set up the UDA and modernised the UVF. They imported weapons and worked with the old apartheid regime in South Africa and brought in a huge amount of weapons.

With respect, I find it remarkable to stand here and listen to the Tánaiste say that David Cameron has shown remarkable determination to get to the truth. He has done no such thing. He tore up an agreement - an agreement Sinn Féin did not concede to at the time, because it fell far short of what the Finucane family wanted. He tore up an agreement made with the Irish Government in Weston Park. The British Government will only face up to these issues if it has no other option. When Tony Blair was faced with the huge campaign on the issue of Bloody Sunday, he had no other option but an inquiry, particularly when he read the report put together in co-operation with people in Derry and the Irish Government of the day.

We cannot behave as a junior partner on this. The relationship between this part of the island and successive Governments with Britain has been that of junior partner to the British Government. I ask the Tánaiste, as I have consistently asked the Taoiseach, to launch a diplomatic initiative in the USA, in Europe, at the UN on the Finucane family case. It is not enough to say we support the family. We must take the case and develop a campaign, using the goodwill we have internationally and using our status as having the most successful peace process in modern times. I commend that approach to the Tánaiste.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore

More than 3,500 people died during the Troubles and every man, woman and child who died left behind relatives and friends who mourn the loss of their loved ones to this day. I have met many of those relatives, as have other Members, and we all know the pain they endure and the accommodation they have been asked to make for peace. We should not lose sight of the fact the majority of victims of the Troubles were murdered by republican and loyalist paramilitary groups. There is no hierarchy of loss or grief and no acknowledgement or apology by those responsible for the loss can undo the wrong that was done. On a day when the murder of Pat Finucane has been recalled so vividly, for Geraldine, Katherine, Michael and John, we should be mindful of the many thousands of relatives of victims across Ireland who grieve the loss of a loved one.

As I have said, certain cases raise specific concerns about collusion and, therefore, about confidence in the administration of justice. The murder of Pat Finucane is one of those cases. The Government's view and position, favouring a public inquiry, is underpinned in this House by an all-party motion, which was agreed in 2006, which recalled the agreement of Weston Park, took note of Judge Cory's findings of collusion, commended the Finucane family for their courageous campaign and called for the immediate establishment of a full, independent, public, judicial inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane. That is the position the Government is advancing.

I will discuss the de Silva report with Secretary of State Villiers and with Deputy Prime Minister Clegg. The Taoiseach has already spoken with Prime Minister Cameron on the issue. It is important this House maintains what has been a clear all-party position on this, which is to seek a public inquiry. The Government will press the case for that public inquiry at every opportunity.

Septic Tank Registration Scheme

Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy

I was prompted to raise this issue as someone who lives in a rural area, a small parish in the foothills of the Slieve Bloom mountains in Offaly, who has a septic tank to deal with waste water. Therefore, I am only too well aware of the importance of ensuring that properly functioning waste water systems are in place. I am also cognisant that the deadline for registration of septic tanks is 1 February 2013. It is because of this I wish to bring this matter to the Minister's attention.

A number of people have contacted me with regard to their concerns that if they are required to carry out remedial works or replace their septic tanks on foot of an inspection, they will not be able to afford it. I am particularly concerned about people on low incomes and the elderly. Clarity in this area has been very difficult to establish, due to the misinformation being circulated by many Opposition Deputies and active campaigning against the registration of septic tanks in many rural areas. This has left people on low incomes and the elderly, whose septic tanks may have been installed decades ago, worried about the costs involved in replacing them if required. Incredible sums have been bandied about, up to €20,000, which I believe is incorrect.

I have always believed this issue is a matter of public health and that it is not be of rural Ireland being under attack again, as many people would have us believe. Most people I know who own a septic tank have it desludged regularly in the interest of its proper functioning, and, more important, in the interest of protecting the water table to ensure there is clean drinking water for everyone. If we have clean drinking water, we have clean water for all other uses, such as for agriculture.

I am aware that three years ago, the European Court of Justice ruled that Ireland had failed to adopt the necessary legislation to comply with Articles 4 and 8 of the EU waste directive relating to domestic waste water being disposed of in the countryside through septic tanks or other waste water systems. This ruling highlighted deficiencies in our legislation regarding the disposal of waste water. I know the Minister has been determined to protect our water, as well as to achieving compliance with the waste water directive. I hope the many years of neglect in dealing with the matter by previous Administrations will not expose our State to EU fines as a result. In fact, there has been quite an amount of hypocrisy involved in this issue, with some people who were in government at the time leading the anti-registration charge over the past year.

I believe a scheme of financial support should be put in place for the upgrading of septic tanks, whether for repair or replacement. As a member of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht, I know that compliance with the directive has been an issue of concern. This was highlighted to the Minister when this matter was discussed by the committee. The Minister has stated clearly he will keep an open mind on the issue of possible financial support, despite our poor financial situation. I sincerely hope he is making every effort to put such a scheme in place to assist people who need it if and when their tanks are inspected and they need repair or replacement.

Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Phil Hogan)

I thank Deputy Corcoran Kennedy for the opportunity to address this issue. The House will be aware that the Water Services (Amendment) Act 2012 provided for the establishment of a new system for the registration and inspection of septic tanks and other domestic waste water treatment systems. The 2012 Act augments the duty of care placed on the owners of on-site wastewater treatment systems, under section 70 of the Water Services Act 2007, to ensure that their systems do not endanger public health or the environment.

I made regulations in June setting out the procedures for householders to register details of their treatment systems with their water services authorities. The Local Government Management Agency has developed an on-line registration facility on a shared service basis for the 34 county and city councils. The agency is tasked with managing a central bureau to process written applications accompanied by registration fees. The registration facilities have been available since 26 June and as of today, more than 290,000 owners have registered their systems. By comparison, last year's census recorded that almost 500,000 houses were served by septic tanks or other on-site treatment systems. Householders who have not yet registered have until 1 February 2013 to register their systems. I encourage each of them to register on time to ensure they are in compliance with the law. Registration can be done on-line, by post or at local authority offices.

I remind the House that this legislation was introduced to ensure compliance with a European Court of Justice ruling against Ireland. It is important that the legislation is fully implemented, not just to comply with the court ruling but also to protect our valuable water resources, as the Deputy said. Regrettably, my predecessors in government exposed the State to potential EU fines. I am aware that some householders are concerned that they may incur significant expense in repairing or upgrading their systems if they fail an inspection. As I have said on a number of occasions, I am prepared to consider all possible options to provide financial support for householders whose wastewater treatment systems are deemed, following inspection under the new legislation, to require substantial remediation or upgrading. The matter is under review in my Department and I expect to be in a position to make a decision shortly. I emphasise that the provision of financial support must have regard to the overall budgetary situation and the financial position of the individual households concerned.

Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy

I welcome the Minister's comments. I hope the decision on the review by the Department will be made as soon as possible. The Minister has said 290,000 systems have been registered. While I understand that up to 66% of systems have been registered in some water service authority areas, it seems that the figures in others are low. If we could have clarity on the possibility of a scheme being introduced to help people on low incomes - I am thinking particularly of elderly people on low incomes - it would encourage more people to register their systems by the February 2013 deadline.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I accept what the Deputy is saying. There is concern, some of which has stemmed from the irresponsible dissemination of misinformation in certain parts of rural constituencies. I suggest some of the Deputies involved who were serving in government when this case came before the courts and did nothing about it for four years thereafter are responsible for the European Court of Justice ruling which has exposed the State to potential fines on a daily basis, as well as a lump sum fine. A decision in that regard is likely to be made soon. I am conscious that the misinformation I have mentioned is causing many elderly people and low-income families to worry that they will potentially have to make a major financial outlay to carry out remediation works. That will not be the case. If difficulties arise on foot of the inspections that will be carried out, it will be possible to deal with most of them by means of desludging, in the same way that applied when Cavan County Council introduced such a scheme. I am prepared to examine a scheme to assist people in exceptional circumstances, for example, if it costs €3,000 or €4,000 to resolve serious structural issues associated with remediation.

Waste Management Inspections

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this matter for debate. As the Minister knows, there have been radical changes in the waste industry in the past decade. When Dublin City Council had to privatise its waste collection service last January, it was widely seen as a disaster. I remind the Minister who spoke about those who had spread misinformation in rural areas in response to the previous matter that there are irresponsible Deputies in urban areas also. The actions of the Socialist Workers Party in campaigning for the non-payment of waste charges meant that is was no longer economically viable for Dublin City Council to stay in the waste management business. That resulted in the privatisation of the service, which means we now have a poorer service.

The company that received the contract in Dublin, Greyhound, has engaged in many practices that need to be regulated. It started to distribute letters to customers last week informing them that it would have to charge €1.50 for each bag of recyclable material. That will bring an end to the practice of picking up many bags for free. The Minister will be aware that many houses in the city do not have green bins because they do not have enough space for them. Instead, they put their recyclable waste in green bags. Greyhound which makes massive profits in Ireland has refused to publish its accounts. Given that it charges €9 for a roll of six bags, this latest measure will push people back into putting recyclable waste in black bags. Black bags are not normally full in city areas. Greyhound brought the industry into further disrepute when it imposed dramatic price increases last summer. It piggy-backed on the landfill levy and tried to blame the Minister for the increases, even though they did not equate in any manner to the landfill levy. I tried to highlight this attempt to increase profits at the time.

In May this year some 4,000 tonnes of waste were found illegally stored in County Kildare. A further 2,000 tonnes of illegally stored waste were discovered in June. Last month some 1,000 bales, containing almost 1,000 tonnes of illegally stored waste, were found on a farm in north Dublin. I appreciate that the EPA is investigating these cases. For this to happen once can be considered an oversight. For it to happen twice can be considered a mistake. Now that illegally stored waste has been found three times in a single year, it must be seen as a pattern. It is clear that we need a waste regulator, just as we have regulators in areas such as the energy and communications sectors. The waste industry in the State has almost been entirely privatised. We have multiple operators in many areas across Ireland and need a regulator who could control how the industry operates. I suggest the national regulator should set overall guidelines, to be enforced by the local authorities. We will have the chance to do this when we reform local government radically. Councillors are well placed to monitor, report on and deal with these problems.

The free-for-all that we are seeing needs to be controlled. We need legislation and regulation and citizens need to have confidence in the waste industry. We need to ensure the waste stream is properly regulated and recycling is encouraged. Many of the waste companies will not collect bins unless a hefty sum of money is left on account as a deposit. If a customer wishes to change from one operator to another, he or she will lose the money that is on deposit. This is happening right across Ireland and another example of the citizen losing out in this unregulated and poorly legislated for area.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. I am aware of his personal interest in waste policy and he has raised a number of important and serious issues, with which I will ask my officials to deal immediately.

Local authorities are responsible for the enforcement of environmental standards for the collection of waste. They consider applications for waste collection permits from service providers. They enforce the conditions of the permits granted on the basis of national policy and regional waste management plans. I accept the Deputy's point that we should examine the conditions attaching to these permits much more rigorously and ensure they are enforced. The treatment and management of waste material is subject to a registration and permit system by local authorities, or licensing by the Environmental Protection Agency, as appropriate. The primary purpose of the licensing, permit and registration system is to facilitate appropriate controls on waste facilities and activities in a way that ensures good and consistent waste management practice and the implementation of high standards of environmental protection. I regret to say this is not happening. The waste industry is further subject to additional regulation outside the remit of my Department. Under animal by-products legislation, for example, composting and anaerobic digestion plants which process food waste are subject to approval by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.

As the Deputy knows, my Department's role is to provide a comprehensive legislative and waste policy framework through which the enforcement authorities operate. I published the Government's new waste policy, A Resource Opportunity - Waste Management Policy in Ireland, in July. It sets out the actions Ireland will take to make the further progress needed to become a recycling society, with a clear focus on resource efficiency and the virtual elimination of landfilling municipal waste, thereby minimising our impact on the environment.

Maximising the resources recovered from waste is a central principle of the policy, which contains measures to ensure that prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery are favoured to the disposal of waste, in accordance with the waste hierarchy as set out in the waste framework directive.

The performance of the household waste collection market, in particular, will be crucial to achieving our overall policy objectives and meeting our targets on landfill diversion. Under the new policy, household waste collection will be organised under an improved regulatory regime to address a number of problematic issues. Waste collection companies will have to adhere to improved standards of service, incentivise households to segregate waste and be much more transparent about their charging structures, and they will be held to account for failures under the new permitting regime. This is the key point - enforcement. At the same time, an onus will be placed on households to show how they manage their waste in an environmentally acceptable manner.

The Competition Authority is also being requested by the Government to maintain oversight of household waste collection markets and will report as part of a mid-term review of the implementation of the policy to be carried out in 2016. It is my intention that the implementation of the policy will deliver both enhanced environmental performance, a quality service for consumers and better enforcement in regard to the people collecting the waste.

Deputy Kevin Humphreys

I thank the Minister and I know he is very committed to reforming the whole waste industry. We need to move very quickly because, unfortunately, there are cowboys operating in the market and this is giving a very bad reputation to the waste industry. There are many responsible waste management companies which are customer friendly and abide by good practice. They charge only on what people actually put out instead of making people prepay, they encourage recycling and they work for a better industry. However, while I believe by far the majority want to develop a sustainable industry, this is being greatly undermined by what is happening, particularly in our capital city. People are being incentivised not to recycle because they are being overcharged for recycling.

I ask the Minister to move as quickly as possible to put regulations and legislation in place. I look forward to the issue coming before the committee. At present in our cities, the local authorities can put in place by-laws stating when the citizen can place a bin on the street but they cannot make a by-law to force companies to collect within those hours. What is happening currently in the capital is that while residents have to put their bins out by 7 a.m. and they are to be collected by 7 p.m., some of these cowboys do not collect them that day and instead collect them the following day, so there are bins on the streets for two days.

This is unacceptable in a capital city. We need to empower local authorities so they can take action, and we have to do it from this House. We have to give them the powers to bring in the by-laws and the legislation. I believe passionately that we need to move quickly on this issue. If we are reforming local government, we have to ensure the councillors on the ground have the power to regulate and to put in the specifications regarding how these cowboys operate. If we delay too long, the cowboys will have undermined the very good companies which operate to high standards and best practice, and they will go out of business.

I urge the Minister to take action as speedily as possible. I will certainly facilitate him as far as possible through the environment committee and I will give any other assistance I can. Most Members see this happening on a daily basis, from Cork to Dublin to Galway. It is a national issue. These cowboys have to be put out of business. We need strong, firm legislation supported by a regulator. I urge the Minister to move as quickly as he can.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Humphreys about the requirement for a level playing field and a standardised service across the country. The most important person in this is the customer. The people have gone to enormous lengths to do the right thing by our waste policy in terms of reuse, recycling and recovery. It is not good enough if waste operators are flouting the enforcement procedures that are in place at present under our permit and licensing system.

Under the new waste policy, a new and strengthened regulatory regime for household waste collection will be introduced in 2013. New mandatory service standards, including the introduction of customer charters, will ensure consumers experience improved customer service from their operator. The key point, as I said, is to ensure that local authorities have the legislative wherewithal, including recourse to by-laws, to ensure this is properly enforced and implemented.

We have a lot of law in this country but we do not always have the best enforcement, and the case highlighted by the Deputy is a good example. The work of developing the new regulatory structures to give effect to the measures has commenced and my Department is engaging with the stakeholders at present in regard to the detailed design of the new system. I welcome Deputy Humphreys' co-operation in this matter on the environment committee. I hope to be in a position to bring new proposals to the committee and to the House as quickly as possible in 2013.

Rural Social Scheme Administration

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

I am very disappointed the relevant Minister has not bothered to come to the House to take the issue.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I am first sub.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

The arrangement when Topical Issues were introduced was that Ministers were to come to the House. The Minister for Social Protection is obviously around the House today because she has a Bill in the House. However, as a rural Deputy, I am sure the Minister present will understand my concern in regard to the issue I raise.

The rural social scheme was introduced in 2004. The idea was that, rather than paying farm assist to farmers, we would give an opportunity to farmers to supplement their farming income by working on a scheme. To be eligible for the rural social scheme, one had to be qualified by being in receipt of a means tested qualifying payment, in most cases the farm assist payment. This was a mechanism by which we could bring the income of low income farmers up to an adequate level so they would be able to sustain a reasonable livelihood.

The idea of the scheme was to be flexible and to operate around the requirements of a farmer to farm while, on the other hand, using the talents of farmers, which are many, to make a contribution to community services. There was, therefore, a huge double win in the scheme, namely, the win for the farm family in terms of income and also in terms of income certainty in that they got a fixed amount of income which was €20 more than the basic farm assist rate and was the exact same as that paid under the community employment schemes.

Farmers who went on the scheme have time and again told me there are two major benefits for them. The first was the obvious one in regard to income and the second was in regard to social contact. One of the big changes in farming is that the meitheal has gone - the idea of people gathering to save the hay or doing all the jobs that would have been done 20, 30, 40 or 50 years ago by a group of people but which are now often done by one person working on their own. Therefore, many farmers said to me that the socialisation of working was of equal importance to the income gained.

I know from evidence produced to me when I was in the Department of Social Protection that the negative effects of under-employment on people's health are clearly measurable. From the community's point of view, farmers were not unemployed. We were not talking about unemployed people but under-employed people who, because of mechanisation, did not need to put 40 hours a week into their farms. These people brought a huge wealth of can-do and experience to the job. Any community that had a rural social scheme in operation will testify to the huge amount of work that has been done.

We set up the scheme to function in a streamlined and cost efficient way. It is administered by the Leader partnership companies which come within the Minister's remit. Unlike the community employment scheme, therefore, the number of companies operating under the rural social scheme corresponds exactly with the number of Leader partnership companies which I understand is fewer than 40. This ensured the administration was slim-line, as was the insurance.

The benefits of the scheme are clear, but I am concerned by persistent reports in various newspapers that the Department of Social Protection, instead of expanding the scheme to cover every farmer in receipt of a farm assist payment, is instead considering its cessation. It makes no sense that the Department would choose, rather than paying people to make a contribution to the community by providing enhanced services, to pay them for doing nothing. Will the Minister give a clear statement that there is no such intention within the Department, that the scheme will remain as a fundamental part of the infrastructure provided and, furthermore, that it will be expanded to include every person in receipt of a farm assist payment.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Deputy clearly does not realise we are in a bailout programme if he imagines that we can give money willy-nilly to everybody in the country under every possible scheme. The rural social scheme provides income support for farmers and fishermen who were in receipt of certain social protection payments. In return, those participating in the scheme are engaged in supporting the provision of a broad range of services of benefit to rural communities. The scheme is delivered and managed at a local level through 35 local development companies and by Údarás na Gaeltachta in Gaeltacht areas. The funding provision enables 2,600 participants to work for 19.5 hours per week, supported and monitored by 130 supervisor positions.

I am pleased to inform the Deputy that it is not anticipated that any change in the scheme's operation will be made in 2013. Once again, his concerns are unwarranted. In fact, the Department of Social Protection has provisionally provided €45 million to meet the costs arising next year. As with all areas of expenditure, the Department will seek to deliver the scheme for better value and proposals to this end will be made to the local development companies and Údarás na Gaeltachta in the coming weeks. Participants in the scheme are contracted annually to work their hours in a manner that meets their farming or fishing requirements. Continued participation is limited to those who maintain an entitlement to the underlying social protection payments and meet other criteria in respect of farming or fishing. While it is not intended that each participant will remain on the scheme indefinitely, there is no time limit for participation once the underlying eligibility for social protection payments remains. Eligibility for the scheme is limited to those in receipt of farm or fish assist or a range of other specified social protection payments. All participants must be actively engaged in farming or fishing and spousal swaps are permitted in the case of an eligible person not wishing to participate. Given the nature of the underlying qualifying criteria, participants are required to confirm that they continue to be eligible.

The scheme has been an important catalyst, as the Deputy observed, in the development and underpinning of a range of services in rural areas. In particular, services to older people which are widely available in urban areas could not otherwise be delivered in rural communities. Significant improvements to the rural environment are also being made through the maintenance of the built heritage, improvements to and maintenance of community amenities and support for a range of community activities which build on existing social and community infrastructure. Nearly 3 million hours of work are delivered annually by participants. While the benefits to communities are key outcomes of the scheme, the benefits to participants are wroth noting. Although the financial benefits can be relatively small in individual cases, they are nevertheless important. Equally important are the related benefits of participation for individuals who may, due to changes in social, farming practices and rural demography, be socially isolated.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

I thank the Minister for giving a good summary of the scheme I set up. I compliment him on his accuracy.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Unlike the Deputy, I am always willing to acknowledge the worth of initiatives introduced by other Governments.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

Has a review of the scheme been carried out either by the Department of Social Protection or on its direction or by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform or on its direction? If such a review has been initiated, is it completed? If completed, did it recommend the continuation or cessation of the scheme? Will it be possible to obtain a copy of any report prepared and the recommendations made? Can the Minister give an undertaking that the scheme will continue in operation after 2013?

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Deputy is moving the goalposts.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

If it were to be discontinued in 2013, that decision would have been announced in the budget and there would be no budgetary provision. I accept that such a provision has been made. In the aftermath of the budget, however, newspapers began reporting that the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform had recommended closure of the scheme following a review. That Department has not taken the opportunity to deny the rumours. I ask the Minister to address these very specific questions.

Deputy Phil Hogan

The Deputy is on his usual hobby horse of scaremongering people into believing a spending programme is to be abolished. I am pleased to confirm, on behalf of the Department of Social Protection, that this scheme will not be abolished.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

It will not be abolished in 2013.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Every scheme is under review in every budget. The Deputy was in government long enough to know how these matters work. Moreover, he knows why we are where we are in terms of the country's financial position. The Minister for Social Protection deserves great credit for ensuring, notwithstanding the difficult financial position for her Department, the same level of participation will be available to eligible applicants under the scheme in 2013. I hope she will be in a position to retain the provision in 2014, pending an examination of the financial position at the time of next year's budgetary process. Nobody can give a greater commitment than this at this time, no more than the Deputy, as Minister, was in a position to do so in respect of any scheme. He should refrain from seeking to reinvent the rules. This is a good news story. The Deputy should be glad that the scheme he introduced for good reason will be maintained in 2013. I am sure he will welcome the Minister's achievement in this regard.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív

The Minister did not indicate whether a review was being or had been conducted.

An Ceann Comhairle

That completes the Topical Issue debate for today.