Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 Jan 2014

Vol. 827 No. 1

Leaders' Questions

Last week, I spoke about the secrecy surrounding the establishment costs of Irish Water and the failure, in particular, to provide any detailed responses to a series of parliamentary questions on that subject over the previous 12 months. I went on last Thursday to ask the Tánaiste if he could give me a reason the Government agreed to approve bonuses to the staff of Irish Water - the State will be liable for up to €2 million in respect of bonuses - and what was the rationale behind that, particularly given the comments of the Minister, Deputy Burton, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, and the Minister, Deputy Howlin, who were so strongly opposed to the idea of bonuses in situations like this. The Minister, Deputy Burton, said she would raise it at the Cabinet today and with her fellow Ministers. Can the Taoiseach explain why the Government decided to approve bonuses for the staff in Irish Water and can he confirm if the Minister, Deputy Burton, raised it with him and with other Ministers at Cabinet today?

A significant number of senior staff at Irish Water have been recruited from local authorities, from Bord Gáis and from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Can the Taoiseach confirm that such staff received generous lump sums on retirement and pensions before moving on to Irish Water. Can he give details of that to the House and can he confirm that? Why was there so little emphasis on external recruitment to Irish Water?

The Taoiseach said to me last week that Irish Water would be subject to proper parliamentary questions and responses. In an extraordinary contribution to the Private Members' debate that evening, the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd, flatly contradicted the Taoiseach and said that the opposite would be the case, that the Minister would not be giving any detailed responses in regard to Irish Water into the future. Last evening, Deputy Barry Cowen belatedly received an apology from the Secretary General of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government because of the failure to give adequate responses to his parliamentary questions, but bizarrely in the context of that telephone conversation went on to confirm that there would be no future responses to parliamentary questions on Irish Water given in this House. Who is correct? Is it the Taoiseach, the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd or the Secretary General of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government?

Returning to my first question, why did the Taoiseach approve the bonuses? Can he confirm, and does he believe it is acceptable, that staff, including senior managers, moving from local authorities would receive generous lump sums, and bonuses now in Irish Water, as a result of this operation?

Irish Water was set up by a Government decision to provide a single utility to take over from 34 local authorities and deal with the situation that has arisen in recent years in the context of the supply of quality water, the capacity and standard of that supply and so on and the opportunity by so doing to extract and save €1.1 billion in operating costs over the next seven years. Irish Water was set up following a tender process and it was agreed by Government that it should be set up on the basis of the tender submitted by Bord Gáis, which had expertise available to it through its development over quite a period. Were Irish Water to be set up independently as a single entity, the estimated cost would have been twice what has been put in for the commencement of Irish Water.

As the Deputy is aware, Bord Gáis has a situation where performance pay is available to employees. As he is aware also, the unions in Bord Gáis have agreed that there will be a pay freeze until 2016. The unions have further agreed that no increments should be paid and that the performance pay is based on achieving a particular set of criteria, objectives and targets. The same applies in the case of Irish Water, Uisce Éireann. I have asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, in the interests of transparency and accountability, to have the chief executive provide him with the full information on those criteria that apply in the case of Uisce Éireann, Irish Water, so that everybody will understand what is involved if an employee is to achieve an output of work or a productivity that would allow him or her achieve a performance pay rating.

Having spoken to an engineer who came from a local authority to Irish Water as part of a normal application process, the person involved is probably worse off in the sense that the level of travel and subsistence available during the person's time as a local authority employee is not available now to the same extent.

Also, the scale of holidays is seven days less.

The chief executive will be happy to lay all of that out before people to ensure there is full transparency in that regard.

As the Deputy knows, Irish Water will be subject to the freedom of information Act. The apology given by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to Deputy Cowen and some other Member who put in a question was because-----

Yes, Deputy Humphreys got it last week but Deputy Cowen only got it last night.

Yes. It was because the Department sent it to the company, the parliamentary questions having come in the normal way, and they were not followed up by the company. The apology was on that basis. This is a public utility and as I said last week, it will be scrutinised by the Oireachtas and by civil society because it is subject to the freedom of information Act. That is the reason it was set up in the way it was set up and that is why that applies.

With a minute remaining, I find the Taoiseach's response to be incredible in terms of the bonus. Basically, what he is saying is that the bonus culture is back, and it is alive and well in Irish Water, and the Taoiseach and the Government approved it, despite what the Minister, Deputy Joan Burton, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, and the Minister, Deputy Howlin, said. I asked the Taoiseach a simple question: why did he approve it? He knew about this but he went against his own advice. The Taoiseach said the estimate was that it would be cheaper. The opposite is the case. The advice the Taoiseach got from PricewaterhouseCoopers was that it would be far more expensive to set up Irish Water as a subsidiary of Bord Gáis. That was the actual advice, and that has proven to be the case. A total of €168 million, and €2 million on bonuses, will go to the staff. They all said they were against bonuses-----

The Deputy might ask a question.

-----that they would not happen and we would never see them again but now it is happening in the context of Irish Water, which is established to charge for water. It will not take over the work of the local authorities. We know part of the deal is that the local authorities will continue to deliver and maintain water services through their service level agreements for the next 12 years.

I asked the Taoiseach about lump sums and he did not respond, skirting around it with the usual old story about a fellow he met.

What does Paddy think now?

I asked the Taoiseach a question about senior managers who came from local authorities to Irish Water. Can he confirm that these managers received a lump sum on retirement as well as generous pension arrangements, and have now moved seamlessly into senior level positions at Irish Water, where they will enjoy these bonuses? Does the Taoiseach think this is acceptable and can he confirm whether it is the case?

All of the information is available to the chief executive of Irish Water.

The Taoiseach should tell us.

It should be put in the public domain and there is nothing to hide. Those who were employees of local authorities were subject to the Haddington Road agreement and were part of the discussions and negotiations.

I do not understand what that has to do with it.

Deputy Martin made the point about PwC. The Government must make decisions, just as Deputy Martin's Government did. I distinctly remember the previous Administration paid €7 million to a major financial company in respect of the bank guarantee. Deputy Martin said he should not have done what he did, yet that was paid for three days' work.

We are talking about now.

The Taoiseach voted for the bank guarantee.

Deputy Martin continuously interrupts, but the situation in our country is that 18,000 people on public water supplies either must boil water or have a restriction in place. Can we continue with that? The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that we must take remedial action on supplies where there are risks-----

They will still be boiling it.

-----covering almost 1 million people, or 16% of supplies, and including some of the very large supply areas such as parts of the Dublin city water supply and the Cork city supply. In Dublin there are serious supply constraints, as daily demand is 96% of supply. We saw what happened with the Poulaphouca reservoir before Christmas. There are still large amounts of water unaccounted for, with a national average of 40.8%. This cannot continue-----

The Government spent €180 million on a new water utility.

-----and it should not continue. Irish Water is a new utility to provide a facility for consumers, businesses and future development with high standards, efficiency in terms of leaks and delivery, and capacity for the future. It stands to reason. I meet companies that come to me and say we need X million litres per day. We cannot have up to 40% of the taxes people pay leaking into the ground. It is not viable and it has gone on for the past 35 years. It is time to put a stop to it.

Paddy is not happy.

Tá tuairisc amuigh inniu a léiríonn arís go bhfuil ár gcórás sláinte ina bpraiseach. Is annamh a bhíonn seachtain ann nuair nach gcloiseann muid drochscéal faoin tseirbhís sláinte atá ar fáil do mhuintir an Stáit. The Taoiseach is probably aware that significant concerns were raised about overcrowding in the State's hospital emergency departments in a letter from the Irish Emergency Medicine Trainees' Association. These are senior doctors operating in emergency units and they are deeply concerned that trolley numbers remain extremely high. In the past two weeks, trolley numbers have exceeded 300 a day. The association also claims that the recommendations on overcrowding in the May 2012 HIQA report on Tallaght hospital are being ignored by senior hospital consultants. This is a scandal if it is accurate. Over a year after the HIQA report, severe overcrowding remains and patient safety is obviously a risk. Quality of care is being compromised. The letter states: "The appalling conditions that our patients endure in [emergency departments] should not go unchallenged." These are not my words nor the words of an Opposition or Sinn Féin spokesperson but the words of professionals.

We also learned from the Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation that 394 patients are on trolleys today in emergency units and wards across the State, of which 308 are in emergency units. Meanwhile, the head of the HSE has said bluntly that the money allocated for the health service will not be enough to deliver the services required. What passes for a public health system is crumbling before our eyes and under the watch of this Government. Will the Taoiseach commit to providing the necessary funding to the 2014 HSE service plan and will he commit to reversing the disastrous health cuts that the Minister for Health is responsible for?

Deputy Gerry Adams's comments about the edifice of the health service crumbling are an insult to those who work in front-line services in every hospital across the country. Anyone who has had the opportunity to sit in an emergency unit can see the work done by people in challenging positions.

They have been sitting there for three days.

Deputy Adams should not tell us it is crumbling. Deputy Adams, above all people, decided to fly off to other pastures to have his treatment carried out, and good luck to him.

Deputy Adams went to America, with or without a visa.

The number of patients on trolleys in hospitals was 40% lower in the first two weeks of this year compared to two years ago. The number of patients counted on trolleys was one third lower last year compared to 2011. That amounts to 30,000 fewer patients waiting on trolleys. Since we began to count such things in hospitals, why is it that we always had a spike in numbers waiting in January? It was not until the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, set up the special delivery unit that it became apparent that in many hospitals professional personnel went away for a week or ten days in January and cover was not made available to keep things moving through. This year is no exception, and higher numbers of elderly people are being admitted to hospital.

Deputy Adams's figures are not correct. At 8 o'clock this morning, 21 January 2014, the number of people on trolleys was 341 and at 2 p.m. it was 210. It is still too many, but the impact made by the Minister, Deputy Reilly, in deliberately dealing with this has brought about substantial improvements in respect of the number of patients on trolleys.

Deputy Adams's comment about HIQA will be investigated to see if the recommendations are being implemented. We will report to the House on that.

I thank the Taoiseach profoundly for his concern about my personal health. He repeats it ad nauseam every time I ask a question about health services.

Why has Deputy Adams no confidence in the Irish system?

It is very touching but it is also none of his business.

Deputy Adams is speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

Members should stay quiet.

The people who work in the health service have my utmost respect and admiration because they work under dreadful conditions, and only for their confidence, their love of the job they do and their commitment, we would be in a worse position. The Taoiseach ignored the question. I am pleased that he will investigate the claim that the HIQA Tallaght report of 2012 is being ignored. I look forward to a report from the Taoiseach.

In terms of front-line services, the Government lurches from one debacle to another. Last week it was Deputy Phil Hogan and this week it is Deputy James Reilly again, and he will be back again with controversy after debacle. The health service was already at breaking point before the HSE service plan. Some €4 billion has been taken out of the health service since 2008. Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Labour Party, a cosy consensus for cuts, all worked at that.

The Deputy is out of time.

Thousands of citizens faced the loss of discretionary medical cards this year, including seriously ill children and children with disabilities. Prescription charges have been trebled by the Minister, who condemned them when he was in opposition.

It is an amazing figure. Some 375,000 citizens are on outpatient waiting lists, and that is why I say the sense of a public health service is crumbling on the Taoiseach's watch.

Maybe the Deputy will ask a question.

People want and will demand a radical change in direction in the Government's health policy. Against the background of bonuses, back-handers-----

The Deputy is way over his time. Will he please put a supplementary question?

-----and all of that, will the Taoiseach please listen to what patients and professionals are saying, and will he change the direction of his Government's health policy?

The Deputy's personal health is none of my business but what is my business is that he is the elected leader of his party and he is here in the House, and properly so. He is making comments to the effect that the health service is crumbling and the people who work in it, despite their competence and love of the issues involved, are not good enough for the Deputy.

Is the Taoiseach-----

That is not it. It is an unfair system.

Actions speak louder than words.

It is not a fair system.

The Deputy can see my concern for his well-being and health.

It is well-----

Is the health service good enough for the Taoiseach?

He is not in the public health care system.

He will not wait months for an operation.

Deputies should quieten down.

With regard to the waiting list issue mentioned by the Deputy, later this week the Minister will publish figures and even the Deputy will be surprised at the extent of the improvement in terms of persons having to wait for very long periods for attention in Irish hospitals. I hope that when the figures are published this week, the Deputy will appreciate the professional staff involved who have made very significant improvements in the length people must wait over very long periods. The Minister will follow that through over a period with being able to determine just why waiting lists are so long in some cases and not so long in others. Patients are entitled to have information about that issue as well.

I do not accept the Deputy's weekly assertions that the health service is crumbling. It is a challenging period, as the chief executive of the HSE has said quite clearly. Every year is challenging in health and the money allocated this year is very far short of what was allocated during a previous time, when money was so flúirseach that an end to all national emergencies was declared, and yet the service did not measure up to what is being delivered now, having extracted costs, with people delivering so much more in front-line services. There is a belief in being able to deliver in patient care.

The Deputy mentioned medical cards and the Government made a decision this year to give free GP cards to those under five. The Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy White, is dealing with this, and the parents of 240,000 children will benefit. We are moving to a point where every person in the country will be entitled to GP coverage, as we approach the time to introduce universal health insurance from 2016.

There is major restructuring going on and it is in the interest of extracting costs but not lessening the quality of service. It is about patient care and seeing that it can be delivered. The group system introduced by the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, is far more effective within the regions, where hospitals exist so that they can give the best for all the services to the patients, which must be the first priority.

Communities across the country are angry and frustrated yet determined to oppose EirGrid's intolerable proposal to erect 250 monster pylons, carrying 400 kVA overhead power lines across Munster and Leinster. Thousands of people turned out for meetings in opposition to these plans and there has been significant development over the Christmas and new year.

The first was the revelation that there have been 35,000 submissions to EirGrid in opposition to these plans, and that shows the depth and strength of feeling of opposition to these proposals. In its submission, Fáilte Ireland has also criticised these EirGrid plans, and that body has particular relevance with regard to tourism and job creation. Every week Government Oireachtas Members and MEPs are appearing on the front pages of local newspapers and on local radio to oppose EirGrid's plans. I welcome this and hope it is not just another election promise to be broken when the local and European elections are over. The newly appointed chair of EirGrid told us he would not live near these pylons and today in the Irish Examiner , half of the Government Deputies living along the proposed route, some of them sitting behind the Taoiseach as we speak, have stated they would not live near these pylons. Almost three quarters have stated that this project would damage the landscape and tourism, and several have stated that they do not believe EirGrid's claim that there are no health implications.

One of the lads is beside the Taoiseach.

We are also indebted to the Irish Examiner because on 30 December it reported that the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, wrote to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan-----

He can have a word now. He is beside the Taoiseach.

The Minister for Health indicated his concern about these pylons and the link with childhood cancers. He referenced the Dublin City University public health expert, Professor Anthony Staines, who has stated that "it is well established that low-frequency magnetic fields increase the risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia". In view of those developments, will the Taoiseach accept there is a strong, genuine and honestly held view in the public that opposes these pylons?

Does the Taoiseach accept that EirGrid's so-called consultation process is fundamentally flawed and does not conform to the Aarhus Convention? Will the Taoiseach suspend this project, pending a full international, independent assessment of the project, up to and including the question of putting these lines under the ground and sea?

The Minister for Health agrees with Deputy Healy.

I accept there are concerns and anxieties expressed by people across the country.

There are huge concerns. A few of those people beside the Taoiseach have those concerns.

The Taoiseach is not speaking about Doha.

It is right that in a democracy we have always had differing views about major pieces of infrastructure, such as motorways, turbines-----

-----pylons, gas connectors, major buildings etc. This is very normal in Ireland. I also believe that our people are well able to make decisions at the end of the day in respect of the best action to take in the interest of our country. We need to be able to provide an infrastructure that will cater for the next 50 years - for those who come after us - in the context of power supply, capacity to do business, provide employment etc. It is a question of how to do it.

The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, is dealing with this.

Is he back in control?

He extended the period of consultation until mid January and he has now received over 30,000 applications, views and submissions.

Trying to get beyond the local elections.

Many of them repeat the issues but add to the number. The Minister will come back to the Government in the next week or two, I would think, with an initial assessment of the implications and issues raised by the people who took the time to make submissions.

It is an initial assessment.

What about the submission from the Minister, Deputy Reilly?

I thought it was a passing whim.

The Deputy has correctly pointed out that the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, wrote to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte. What did he write about?

Mrs. Murphy's cow.

He wrote about the concerns of people giving out to him about the undergrounding of the cable through Rush, which in some cases was less than a metre from doors. He was entitled to express that concern, as somebody could with regard to overhead pylons etc. There is a very long way to go with this, Deputy Healy-----

We must decide-----

Just ask the Minister of State, Deputy Ring.

We must be very clear. The challenge is-----

Putting the pylons under the ground.

-----finding the best way, in the interest of the country, to provide infrastructure. Deputy Finian McGrath may well laugh.

It is no laughing matter.

The Minister is making me laugh.

If your constituents in Clontarf had an underground cable less than a metre from the door, they might be concerned too.

Please speak through the Chair. Do not encourage them.

The Deputy may smirk and laugh if he so wishes. We need the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, to come back to the Government with his initial analysis of the 30,000 applications that have been sent in. EirGrid will follow that.

It is not meaningful.

This is a process in which there has to be proper, full, thorough, comprehensive consultation.

We do not have it.

Deputy Healy should note I am used to it over very many years. The result has to be that one makes a decision in the best interest of our country, using the best approach.

Will he appoint more consultants?

EirGrid has not defined the lines in a number of cases, as the Deputies know.

The Taoiseach does not want them defined.

It has outlined a series of options from Cork towards the south east, and north east towards Dublin. Obviously, it is its responsibility to set out what it considers the best option of a line-----

Why is the April Bill put back?

Would the Deputy stay quiet, please?

The Minister will present to the Government his initial assessment of the 30,000 submissions to consider the implications.

As the Taoiseach said, there is a very long way to go. I hope it does not depend on when the local and European elections take place. That would appear to me to be the position having listened to Government backbenchers, Members of the European Parliament and even Ministers of State.

The Taoiseach mentioned the word "consultation". Is he satisfied that the EirGrid consultation was adequate? Very many people believe it was fundamentally flawed and does not conform with the Aarhus Convention? I ask for a direct answer on this.

Specifically on the health issue, it is quite clear that EirGrid cannot guarantee safety. It is quite clear that there are significant health issues involved. There are reports, both national and international, including references made by the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, to a local professor at Dublin City University, and there are other international reports-----

The Deputy cannot go into those reports. The Deputy should ask a supplementary question, and he has exceeded his time.

The other international reports raise very serious health issues associated with the pylons, including childhood leukaemia. In view of those reports and the fact that EirGrid cannot guarantee that there are no health implications, I urge that we use the precautionary principle that is accepted at EU and WHO levels when there are health dangers. On this basis, the proposals should be withdrawn and cancelled. Will the Taoiseach suspend this proposal pending the outcome of an international, independent examination including the health issues?

First, Deputy Healy said the situation was fundamentally flawed. In his second question, on whether consultation was adequate, he said this was flawed.

I am not clear on whether-----

I asked whether he was satisfied with the consultation.

I am not clear about whether Deputy Healy is talking about the proposition of strengthening the grid in our country.

It is all misleading.

I am not clear whether he is saying the proposal to strengthen and improve the capacity of the grid is fundamentally flawed or whether the consultation process is flawed.

Is the Taoiseach satisfied with EirGrid's consultation?

We are not having a chat here. There are other Deputies in this Chamber who want to get on with their business.

More than 30,000 people have sent in responses as part of the consultation process. They have written letters and made submissions. The test of the consultation will be borne out by the analysis to be conducted by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when he goes through all of these.

Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes is now opposed to it.

I read in one of the national newspapers last week a letter by a former worker of the ESB who had worked all his life in close proximity to high-tension lines. He made the point that he had lived - thanks be to God - to enjoy the fruits of his pension for many years. He wondered whether any surveys were carried out on people like him who had worked in very close proximity to high-tension lines during their careers.

The line is normally turned off.

The World Health Organization has said the lines do not represent any undue risk. Are we to believe it or not?

At levels generally encountered by members of the public.

People always have different views. I have encountered this on so many occasions over so many years on different issues. I suggest to Deputy Healy that we have a very common sense and rational discussion about this. Let us see the analysis of the 30,000 plus submissions. EirGrid has a responsibility to decide its preferred option independently of the Government.

How independent?

The Government has a responsibility to examine the policy that emerges on the best approach to providing the country's infrastructure for the next 50 years. Deputy Healy will have adequate time to make a full and wholesome contribution to that.

On the question of whether I believe the consultation was adequate, I am used to dealing with people along these lines. Sometimes, no matter who one sends, it is not adequate. Some people will say they are happy while others will say they are not. That is normal human nature. One never gets it right all the time. In this case, we need to see what is in the submissions and analyse the content. EirGrid must do its thing and the Government must respond on what is best to meet the challenge for the next 50 years.

Top
Share