Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 13 Mar 2013

Vol. 796 No. 2

Topical Issue Debate

Pupil-Teacher Ratio

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I am pleased to have the opportunity to raise this issue and I am grateful for the attendance of the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock. I wish to raise the widespread concerns among the Protestant community over the future of educational facilities, with particular reference to primary schools. There are 199 Protestant schools in the State: 124 Church of Ireland, 24 Presbyterian, one Methodist and one Quaker. Fifty of these have fewer than 30 pupils. Fifty are in Dublin, with the remainder dispersed around the country, many in rural locations serving rural families. There is real concern in the Protestant community about smaller schools. It is estimated that 20 of these schools will become one-teacher schools by the year after next. I regard the concept of a one-teacher school to be somewhat undesirable. I would be anxious to hear the Minister of State outline how this will work and how one-teacher schools can be managed. Forty of these schools have fewer than 26 pupils, and 90 have between 26 and 86 pupils. Some 50% of Church of Ireland schools are directly affected and will lose a mainstream class teacher on current enrolment as a result of last year's budget. Depending on enrolments over the next four years, a further 10% of schools could be affected. The cuts will render many of these schools less than viable and many will need to close. This can be compared with the figures for Catholic schools and for schools generally: 11% of Catholic children are in a school of fewer than 86 pupils, while 12% of all children in a school of fewer than 86 pupils. Protestant children are three times more likely to be affected by the change in pupil-teacher ratio than those in other schools, which I believe is unfair. What form of dialogue, consultation or negotiation does the Minister plan in order to deal with the issue?

There are other issues of concern to the Protestant community, including teacher allocation reductions; school transport reductions and eligibility changes; reductions in capitation grants; the removal of the minor works grant after this year; changes to school enrolment, which will undermine the ethos safeguards that have been guaranteed since the foundation of the State; and changes to the role of religious education in schools arising from the patronage forum report. In essence, many schools in my constituency and in the constituencies of the Acting Chairman, Deputy O'Reilly, and the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock, serving a geographically dispersed and culturally distinctive community in rural areas, will close.

The question of amalgamation has been raised, but I do not know what the guidelines are for amalgamations. What dialogue has there been on proposing amalgamation? In most cases, when schools are closed, it will mean the loss of Protestant schools, not only across large areas of the country but to large sections of Irish society. This is an issue of major concern across communities where education is being sent on a downward spiral. I am not asking for any community to be treated differently, but I want communities to be treated fairly. I want to see meaningful action on the part of the Government to reassure minority communities that there is a place for diversity and pluralism within the system for education provision.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Sean Sherlock)

I am taking this Topical Issue matter on behalf of the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn. I thank Deputy Charles Flanagan for giving me the opportunity to outline to the House the position on the issues raised.

The Government has protected front-line services in schools to the greatest extent possible in the recent budget and there will be no reduction in teacher numbers in primary schools and in free second level schools for the 2013-14 school year as a result of the budget. The DEIS scheme for disadvantaged schools is also fully protected, with no overall changes to staffing levels or funding as a result of the budget.

How best to sustain education provision for widely dispersed and small local communities presents a particular challenge, especially in any locality where enrolment is declining to single figures. The Government is intent on fostering pluralism in school provision. Supporting small communities, including minorities, in maintaining their schools is part of that policy.

The value for money review of small primary school provision is at an advanced stage of preparation. The Department expects to publish the review, at which stage its findings can be debated.

At post-primary level and in order to promote fairness in funding second level schools, a two point increase in the pupil-teacher ratio in fee-charging second level schools will be introduced in September 2013. There are 55 schools, out of 723 post-primary schools, charging fees, ranging from €2,550 to €10,065 for day pupils. The State pays the salary of one teacher for every 21 pupils in these schools, compared with the salary of one teacher for every 19 pupils in schools in the free education scheme. A ratio of 18.25 pupils to one teacher applies in DEIS schools. The pupil-teacher ratio will rise to 23:1 in fee-charging schools from September 2013. However, these schools have the resources, through fees charged, to employ teachers privately, an option not available to schools in the free education scheme. A report on the analysis of the tuition income of fee-charging schools, carried out by the Department of Education and Skills and published on Tuesday, 5 March, shows that fee-charging schools have considerable discretionary income and are best placed to manage with reduced public funding.

There are some concerns within the Church of Ireland community about the recent budget measure affecting fee-charging schools. The Government recognises the importance of ensuring students from a Protestant or Reformed Church background can attend a school that reflects their denominational ethos, while, at the same time, ensuring funding arrangements are in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. The Minister has welcomed the recent announcement by Kilkenny College that it is entering the free secondary school scheme and will cease to charge fees from September next. It is a welcome development that the school considers that its future can best be secured through the free scheme and that it can continue to deliver a Church of Ireland school ethos for families in the south-east in this way.

In regard to capitation, the Department provides capitation funding for all recognised primary schools and second level schools within the free education scheme. There has been some reduction in the level of capitation funding in recent years owing to the need to operate within our tight budgetary requirements.

With regard to the fee-charging Protestant schools, there is an arrangement whereby funding is provided by my Department for the Secondary Education Committee, SEC, an organisation run by the churches involved in managing the Protestant secondary schools. The SEC disburses funds to the Protestant fee-charging schools on behalf of pupils who would otherwise have difficulty in meeting the cost of 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 and this fund ensures necessitous Protestant children can attend a school of their choice.

Regarding school transport provision, a number of changes have been implemented in the primary and post-primary school transport scheme. These changes are being applied equitably on a national basis.

I confirm that the Minister and his relevant departmental officials will continue to engage with the relevant education sector stakeholders, including the Church of Ireland and boards of education, on education provision for all areas.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I have two questions. First, will the Minister of State provide a copy of the guidelines set down by the Department to encourage amalgamations or the process leading towards amalgamation? My understanding is that the position is far from clear and that there is not the level of consultation the Minister of State would like to see, although I accept what he said about there being an opportunity to engage in consultation in the future. It is essential that there be such consultation.

Second, does the Minister of State accept my belief that the concept of a one-teacher school is wholly undesirable and that one-teacher schools do not work? If schools are to close in many parts of the country, there will not, therefore, be a school of the same ethos where children can obtain an education simply because the distance involved will be too great and the area too remote. In effect, where Church of Ireland or other Protestant schools close throughout the country but particularly in the west and County Donegal, there will not be an education of choice available to such children. That is undesirable and I want the Minister, without treating people differently, to ensure they are treated fairly in this regard.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

On the first question, I can facilitate the Deputy in ensuring he receives guidance on the guidelines on and processes involved in amalgamations. On the second question, the Constitution does not allow for either positive or negative discrimination in schools based on their religious ethos.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I do not accept that, but that is another argument.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

I take the Deputy's point on the position in certain areas of the country where there is a one-teacher school and, owing to geographical or other considerations, pupils may not be able to avail of the nearest school with their ethos. This is an issue with which we have to grapple. I know from my experience in my constituency where the Department has had consultations with the local bishop that there are ongoing discussions on how we can sort out these issues. In that sense, there is an open door. On the point on one-teacher schools, I would be of the mindset that we need to take these examples and grapple with them example by example. I would certainly have an open mind in facilitating that process.

Deputy Charles Flanagan

I thank the Minister of State.

Pension Provisions

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I appreciate the opportunity to raise this matter which concerns an anomaly resulting from the decision to abolish the State transition pension from 2014 and what I believe to be a group of forgotten pensioners. The Government aims to save €60 million in a full year following the abolition of the State transition pension from next year. The effect is that, instead of a State pension being available to certain retired persons at the age of 65 years, from next year they will not be able to qualify for a State pension until they reach the age of 66 years. Based on the claim pattern of transition pensioners in recent years, we know that approximately 15,000 people are affected by this change. These are individuals who would have qualified for the transition pension up to the current year but who will not now qualify. Again, based on claim patterns in recent years, approximately 2,000 will be in the position where they have left work and have no entitlement to a State pension. These figures would be expected to grow in the coming years because of the demographics involved but also because it is planned to further raise the State pension age to 67 years in 2021 and 68 in 2028. Most of these 2,000 workers will be in a position where they will be forced to retire at 65 years, arising from long-standing contractual arrangements with their employers, but will be without a State pension on which to fall back. In some cases, they will, of course, be entitled to some form of occupational pension and, in others, some of them may, in fact, be able to find alternative work. In a great many cases, however, they will simply be left stranded. It will mean that many will be forced to sign on the dole for one year in order to have income support. They will face the ridiculous situation where, at the age of 65 years, after years of employment and, in some cases, a lifetime of unbroken employment, they will be forced to endure a gap year before the State will step in with a pension entitlement. They will be considered too old to work by their previous employer but too young to claim a pension from the State. As a recipient of jobseeker's benefit, they will be subjected to the same activation measures required of those genuinely seeking work.

They will end up competing for work and training places with much younger jobseekers.

The live register figures will be inflated next year, artificially raising our headline rate of unemployment. This is not just a problem in 2014 but will be a problem every year afterwards and will grow even worse as the retirement age is further extended. In 2011, the Government was forced by the troika to legislate to raise the pension age. I accept that there was nothing it could do about that. However, it has done very little since then to address the anomaly that has arisen as a result of that legislation.

It is outrageous that the State would effectively turn its back on people who have worked all their lives and tell them that now they have reached the age of 65, they must go on the dole. This is a real insult to that group of people who, in many cases, have worked all their lives. They are very much the forgotten pensioners, ignored by both Departments responsible for labour law and social protection. I call on the Minister to ensure this issue is addressed before the abolition takes effect from January 2014. It is simply too insulting to those people involved and it is a disgrace that there is no plan in place to address this serious anomaly.

Minister of State at the Department of Health (Deputy Alex White)

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue, which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Social Protection. The sustainability of the pension system is a particular concern because of the demographic challenges Ireland faces, the associated increases in pension and other age-related costs and the deterioration in the public finances. The findings of the recently published actuarial review of the Social Insurance Fund showed that the percentage of the population aged over 65 years is projected to increase from 11% of the total population in 2010 to 15% in 2020 and to 24% in 2060, that the pensioner support ratio is projected to decline from 5.3 workers for every individual over pension age in 2010 to 3.9 workers by 2020 and to 2.1 workers by 2060 and that in the medium to long term, pension-related expenditure will account for an increasing proportion of fund expenditure, rising from 57% in 2011 to 85% in 2066. This means that in the future, the task of financing increased pension spending will fall to a diminishing share of the population.

The State pension transition is paid for a maximum of 12 months and is currently available to people who retire from work on reaching age 65, provided they satisfy the necessary PRSI contributions and are retired from insurable employment. This pension was introduced in 1970 when it was known as the retirement pension. It was designed to bridge the gap between the standard social welfare pension age, which at that time was 70 years of age, and retirement age. Over time, the age for State pension contributory pension was reduced to 66 years, with State pension transition being payable at age 65. This will now change in 2014 as provided for in the Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2011, to which the Deputy referred.

In 2014, State pension age will be standardised at age 66 and State pension transition will cease to be paid. In addition, the age at which the State pension contributory will be payable will increase to 67 years from 2012 and to 68 years from 2028. This decision to increase State pension age was taken in the context of changing demographics and the fact that people are living longer and healthier lives and is one of a number of measures implemented to improve the sustainability of pensions for the future. The abolition of the State pension transition removes the associated retirement condition which acts as an incentive to leave the workforce. This has been widely criticised as a barrier to older people remaining in employment. There is no such retirement condition attached to State pension contributory.

In terms of the overall numbers impacted from the abolition of the State pension transition in 2014, an analysis of 2012 figures for the State pension transition indicates that an average of just 13% of those awarded the State pension transition came from employment in the period immediately prior to the receipt of this payment. A significant proportion - 51% - was already in receipt of a social welfare payment prior to claiming the State pension transition. A similar result emerged from an analysis of 2011 the State pension transition recipients. This would indicate that a significant number of people have already left employment well in advance of pension age. It also reflects the fact that there is no statutory retirement age in Ireland.

In terms of financial supports, social welfare benefits will continue to be available to the age of 66 for those who are contractually obliged to leave employment. Also, existing legislation provides that jobseekers whose benefit expires in their 65th year will continue to be paid benefit up until the age of 66. In order to improve pension sustainability and adequacy in the future, it is recognised that in line with increases in pension age, people should have the opportunity and be encouraged to work longer. In the employment relationship, responsibility for setting retirement age is a matter for the employer-employee relationship and the contract of employment. However, it is recognised that the range of policy areas which influence working and retirement decisions fall within the remit of a range of Departments and require a co-ordinated response if labour market participation rates and effective retirement ages of older workers are to improve.

In this regard, an interdepartmental working and retirement group chaired by the Department of Social Protection is currently considering cross-departmental policy issues that may support longer working and thereby improve the sustainability and adequacy of pensions systems. This group, which includes the Departments of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Justice and Equality and Defence, is considering the broad range of issues impacting on the labour market participation of older workers and will prepare preliminary proposals detailing measures which may encourage participation and retention in the labour market of older workers. As social structures in Ireland are changing rapidly, the structures of our social support need to change to accommodate this. The standardisation of the State pension age at age 66 in 2014 is one of the measures planned which aims to improve the sustainability of the Irish pension system.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Olivia Mitchell)

There is very little time left but Deputy Shortall may ask a supplementary question.

Deputy Róisín Shortall

I do not disagree with anything the Minister of State said but he has not addressed the issue I raised. I said that there was a need for a plan to be devised to deal with this anomaly. The Minister of State knows from his own background that people have contractual arrangements whereby they are required to retire at 65. The State is abolishing the State pension transition so people are being left high and dry between the ages of 65 and 66. Does the Minister of State believe it is fair that the State turns its back on people when they are forced to retire at the age of 65 who may have worked their entire lives from 16 or 17 years of age, may have unbroken work records of 48 or 49 years and paid into the social insurance fund for all of those years? Does he believe this situation should arise because it will arise for about 2,000 people and increasing numbers from next January? I am asking him to give an assurance today that the Departments of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and Social Protection will devise a plan to deal with this very unfair anomaly which will arise next January.

Deputy Alex White

I cannot say any more about the matter than I have in the Minister's response other than to draw the Deputy's attention to the working group which could and perhaps should consider the issues raised by the Deputy, including some form of plan. Any particular proposal as to what such a plan might contain should be put to that working group. I understand the issue raised by the Deputy but the legislation is there and the decision has been made in that regard.

Health Screening

Deputy Anne Ferris

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this topical issue as it is one that must be dealt with the greatest urgency. The Irish Heart Foundation has been running a campaign to safeguard Guthrie cards over ten years old which are scheduled to be destroyed by 31 March. These cards, which number nearly one million, are very important as they contain priceless genetic information, including the ability to identify those at risk of sudden cardiac death. I understand the decision to destroy them came about because they were in breach of data protection legislation. I certainly respect that a person's data are of the utmost importance and must be protected. However, I do not believe the correct balance has been struck on this matter. The arbitrary destruction of these cards is too extreme a response and I call for it to be suspended.

Recent polling illustrates that the HSE's information campaign has been ineffective with only 12% of the population aware that the cards are to be destroyed. It is clear that the crucial issue of genetic diagnosis was not addressed in the policy review.

The human tissue Bill could take account of both the data protection requirements and the need to protect the Guthrie cards by providing for an opt-out system. Other countries such as New Zealand, Sweden and Denmark have legislated to protect these cards. This unique bio-bank of vital genetic data should not be destroyed. I urge the Minister of State not to allow this to happen.

Deputy Billy Kelleher

I endorse everything Deputy Ferris has said. The deadline is 31 March but I ask the Minister of State to consider rowing back on that deadline and entering into further discussions about data protection. I do not think the full import of the destruction of these cards has been considered. It would be a very great loss of genetic information in the context of modern technology and advances in genetic and DNA diagnostics. Once these cards are destroyed we will never be able to recover that information. The Irish Heart Foundation has strong views on this issue, explaining that these samples contain priceless genetic information that can be used to identify people at risk of sudden cardiac death. Unless the destruction is halted, we will lose the only remaining opportunity to obtain a genetic diagnosis for the extended family members of more than 1,000 infants, children and young adults who were victims of sudden cardiac death. Those cards are in the possession of the State. Cardiac conditions which may be fatal if untreated could go undetected with the destruction of these cards.

As Deputy Ferris pointed out, an opt-out system is available in other countries; the destruction of a card is only done at the request of the owner. I am convinced that most people do not know this is being planned. This debate may be of benefit in raising awareness of what is going to happen if the deadline is not extended beyond 31 March 2013. An extension would at least allow people to request the retention of these cards if that is possible.

I urge an extension of the deadline and further discussion. As Deputy Ferris said, the human tissue Bill may be a legislative mechanism for addressing this issue to ensure that this very important body of DNA information is retained rather than destroyed. Such destruction could cost lives, particularly considering the advances in DNA and genetic diagnostics.

Minister of State at the Department of Health (Deputy Kathleen Lynch)

I am about to read the official reply but I do not disagree with any of the points made by the Deputies. I thank Deputies Anne Ferris and Billy Kelleher for raising this matter as it provides me with an opportunity to update the House following on the update provided to the Seanad last month by my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Dinny McGinley. As Deputies will be aware, the national newborn screening programme tests thousands of children annually to identify medical conditions which, if untreated, result in severe physical, mental, or developmental harm. The screening programme offers the opportunity to intervene and dramatically alter a child's life course.

Screening cards for newborn children taken between 1984 and 2002 were retained without the informed consent of the parents or guardians of the children. Consequently, there is no written consent for the retention or use of these cards for research or other purposes. In late 2009, the Data Protection Commissioner received a complaint from a member of the public about the retention of newborn screening cards. The basis of the complaint, which was upheld by the Data Protection Commissioner, was that newborn screening cards should not be retained indefinitely without consent as this breached the Data Protection Acts 1998 and 2003. The Data Protection Commissioner stated: "[I]t is important to make clear that the position that developed was unlawful and could not be allowed to continue." Following the ruling, a series of meetings were held between the deputy Data Protection Commissioner, representatives from my Department, the Health Service Executive and the Children's University Hospital, Temple Street, which resulted in a number of changes to the national newborn blood spot screening programme. It was agreed with the Data Protection Commissioner that in order to comply with data protection legislation, cards older than ten years would be destroyed. I reiterate there is no written consent from parents for the retention or use of these cards for research or other purposes.

My colleague, the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, requested the HSE to conduct a review of the decision to destroy these cards, following receipt of representations from a number of people and organisations which pointed out their potential value for research. I understand that the issue is to be dealt with at a meeting on 28 March, in advance of the deadline of 31 March 2013. The review examined both the legal and ethical basis for the retention of newborn screening cards and the potential use of the existing cards for research purposes. The report and recommendations of the review group were submitted in January 2012. The review reaffirmed the original decision reached in 2010 that in order to meet both our ethical and legal obligations, newborn screening cards older than ten years should be destroyed. Following careful consideration, this recommendation was accepted. The review group also explored how the cards could be made available to the research community in a way that is compatible with ethical and legal obligations.

In the interest of facilitating research, the HSE launched a public information campaign on 8 January 2013. This campaign offered members of the public the opportunity to have their screening cards returned to them prior to any destruction of the cards. This campaign will run until 31 March 2013, after which the retrieval procedure will begin. The length of time it takes will depend on how many cards are to be returned. However, no material will be destroyed before all requests have been processed. My colleague, the Minister, Deputy James Reilly, is seeking information from the HSE as to the effectiveness of its campaign to ensure people have been adequately informed of their rights. The results of the Red C poll on the effectiveness of the campaign are quite telling.

Deputy Anne Ferris

I thank the Minister of State for her response. She is correct that the Red C poll shows that only 12% of the population are aware that the cards are to be destroyed. This is a telling statistic which is a reason for the deadline to be extended. The importance of these cards cannot be overestimated. Information supplied by the Irish Heart Foundation today states that the Dutch Parliament is currently reviewing legislation to protect future Guthrie cards. Ten years ago, the Dutch Government ordered the destruction of similar cards, and this decision has been regretted ever since. We do not want to be in the same situation in ten years' time. Measures could be included in the human tissue Bill. I ask the Minister of State to say how the issue will be dealt with on 28 March.

Deputy Billy Kelleher

I thank the Minister of State for her reply. The Red C poll showing a figure of 12% awareness is indicative. We all live by Red C polls in this House. It is clear that the information campaign is not resonating with the public. Conditions such as haemochromatosis and risks such as sudden cardiac death could be identified from the DNA information on these cards. I understand the complexity and constraints of the issue. I urge the Minister of State to see if the deadline can be extended. Perhaps the Attorney General could advise whether the human tissue Bill could be a means of addressing this issue. We could very easily regret the destruction of such a significant body of information, which could be of great benefit to the generations coming after us. I urge caution in this regard. I ask the Minister of State to use all possible mechanisms between now and 31 March. As the Red C poll has shown, nobody knows that this is happening.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch

I thank the Deputies. The Joint Committee on Health and Children will be dealing with the issue in detail on 28 March. It is important that this meeting is being held in advance of the deadline of 31 March 2013. It is very difficult to deal with an issue retrospectively. However, we need to consider further how to deal with it.

The Data Protection Commissioner indicated that the situation which has developed is unlawful. Our job is to deal with legislation and make things either lawful or unlawful. That is what we do every day of the week.

The information contained on the cards in question relates to matters about which we do not even know yet. It is an incredible resource, particularly in the context of any developments which might take place in the future in respect of diabetes, liver disease and - as the Irish Heart Foundation has pointed out - cardiac-related issues. Imagine what would be the position if it were possible to check the records to see who might have a predisposition to sudden adult death syndrome and to discover how we might deal with it. The type of resource that is available in this instance is both unique and incredible. We must examine how we can ensure that this resource will be protected. Perhaps the way to proceed is by introducing an opt-out clause. This is a very serious matter and we should not be rushed into dealing with it. We should take on board the Data Protection Commissioner's opinion but we must also consider how we can protect the resource.

Deputy Billy Kelleher

I thank the Minister of State.

Traffic Management

Deputy Derek Keating

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this issue. During the past 18 months I have been involved in numerous meetings with representatives from South Dublin County Council, the National Roads Authority, NRA, and other interested parties, including community groups, Dublin Bus and the Garda traffic corps, in respect of a serious and emerging issue, namely, the bottleneck on the N4 at the Palmerstown intersection. I have long been an advocate of free-flow traffic systems at peak times. I am sure the Minister of State is aware that in the region of 60,000 vehicles pass through the Palmerstown junction at peak times each day. This is a major junction of great significance. If there is an accident or a traffic light malfunction at this major junction if weather conditions are bad, this can give rise to widespread disruption in Palmerstown itself and in the surrounding areas such as Lucan, Kilcock, Maynooth, etc. Traffic coming from the city centre can also be adversely affected. This junction is so significant that it regularly features on AA Roadwatch reports.

An extremely serious development which has taken place at the junction recently came to my attention. This development came to light following meetings in which I was involved and requests I made. I hosted a number of meetings which were attended by two senior officials from the NRA and a senior official from South Dublin County Council. Those individuals pointed out that in the context of the free-flow arrangements which obtain on the M50, entering and exiting the motorway at Palmerstown depends on traffic light sequence at the junction to which I refer. More alarming, I have learned that the traffic management system at the junction is likely to crash soon because the relevant equipment - computer relays, ducting and cables - has reached end-of-life phase. If this issue is not resolved quite quickly, it will have a profound impact on traffic not only in the Palmerstown and Lucan areas but also throughout the city. In order to ensure that this matter does not reach crisis point - particularly in the context of its impact on the emergency services, on employment and on businesses in Palmerstown, which could suffer as a result of delays caused - the junction must be upgraded quite quickly.

I wish to read into the record a quote I came across when carrying out research recently, namely, "should these signals fail and work becomes necessary in an unplanned manner, there would be major capacity restraints which would adversely affect the flow both to and from Dublin City and would result in the possibility of traffic queuing onto the M50 as well as affecting traffic flow along Kennelsfort Road where considerable and commercial industrial development takes place". The downgrading of the N4 at the Palmerstown junction has resulted in the NRA not funding the essential equipment that is necessary. The experts state that we are sitting on a ticking time bomb. The reality is that the previous Government did not make any provision for the upgrading of the traffic management system in Palmerstown. It has been left to us to do so and we must find a solution because the likely outcome is completely unacceptable. As already stated, that outcome will have an impact not just on the immediate area but also on Dublin city and surrounding areas. I would be very grateful if the Minister of State would give this matter some consideration.

Deputy Alex White

I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar. The improvement and maintenance of regional and local roads is the statutory responsibility of each local authority in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the Roads Act 1993. Works on those roads are funded from local authorities own resources, supplemented by State road grants. The particular section of road to which the Deputy refers was recently downgraded from national road status, previously the N4, to regional road status, now the R148.

There have been very large reductions in roads expenditure over the past number of years and there will be further reductions in the coming years. Let us contrast the figure for 2007, when there were grants of €607 million available towards regional and local roads, with that for this year, when the level of the grants has fallen to €349 million. I am sure the House can see that in light of the current financial position, the main focus must be on the maintenance and repair of roads in which we have already invested and that this will remain the position in the coming years. The reality with regard to funding means that in all areas of activity, priorities have to be set. In this regard, it should be noted that the initial selection and prioritisation of works to be funded is a matter for the local authority. In July last year, the NRA invited applications in respect of consideration for funding under the specific improvement grant scheme. Local authorities were asked to ensure that their total cost of applications did not exceed their 2012 grant allocations. That would allow South Dublin County Council to apply for funding of €800,000 under this grant category. The R148 project was not among the priority projects submitted by the council within the expenditure limit allowed. South Dublin County Council may fund the project in question from its discretionary grant. It has been allocated €736,775 under this grant category for 2013. In addition, the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport recently wrote to local authorities offering them more flexibility in their regional and local road grants. Councils have the opportunity to use up to 30% of their restoration improvement grants and reallocate it to their discretionary grants. In South Dublin County Council's case, this will amount to €556,641 should it wish to avail of the flexibility to which I refer. That would bring the total discretionary grant available to the council to €1,293,416.

It is appreciated that many local authorities are in a position where they are trying to implement savings. However, it is important to reiterate that the role of Exchequer grants in the context of regional and local roads is to supplement councils such as South Dublin County Council in their spending in this area. The reality is that the available funds do not match the amount of work required. The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and local authorities are working closely to develop new and more efficient ways of delivering the best outputs possible with the funding available to them. Given the likely continued squeeze on Exchequer funding, this concentration on efficiency is essential in order to achieve the best outturns for the limited moneys available.

Deputy Derek Keating

I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. I fully understand the situation in which the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport and the Government find themselves. If the funds had been made available or if the previous Government had invested wisely, an underpass would have been built at Palmerstown on the N4. Such an underpass would have been similar to that which was put in place on the same road at the Newcastle Road interchange and which has proven to be very successful. The Minister of State and I both served on South Dublin County Council and we are aware of the constraints under which it is operating. From the discussions in which I have been involved, I am aware that the local authority - for the reasons I have outlined - sees this matter as a priority. As stated earlier, we are sitting on a time bomb and I do not want to think about the consequences when the traffic management system at the Palmerstown junction crashes.

In light of the significance of the traffic management system to which I refer, South Dublin County Council has applied for a separate grant of €300,000. I would be very happy to obtain further information in respect of that matter and pass it on to the Department.

I hope the Government will be able to assist us because the local authority does not have the resources. The money is required to upgrade this road because of its significance to the greater Dublin area.

Deputy Alex White

As Deputy Keating said, we first met when we were both members of South Dublin County Council. It is an excellent local authority but, as was acknowledged by the Deputy, it must operate within the constraints that face it, and all of us. In so far as it is regarded as a priority by South Dublin County Council - the Deputy said that was the case, and I have no doubt it is a priority - there are always competing priorities. The council will have to bring forward its application in the same way as any other council, within the parameters of the rules and opportunities that apply to Exchequer funding, as I set out in the reply. I take the point the Deputy has made, but the response clearly sets out the position.