Topical Issue Debate

North-South Interconnector

Deputy Peadar Tóibín

The country needs an integrated all-Ireland energy market. It also needs sufficient capacity for the future and accessibility to sustainable energy generation. It needs to provide this energy in an even manner across the regions. What we do not need is a system that may endanger the lives and health of citizens or create fear. We do not need a system that will reduce the cost of agricultural land and personal property. We do not need a system that will prevent the development of the energy market for decades, owing to intractable conflict. We do not need a system that will be forced on unwilling communities throughout the State.

In the mid-north east, where it is proposed to provide the north east-south interconnector, we have had six years of this process. We know more than most what is involved. We have had surveys, meetings, fund-raisers, Oireachtas committee meetings and expert reports and in the intervening period there has been a huge increase in the level of technology. We are now faced with confusion.

I believe the Minister made a statement to The Irish Times at the end of January indicating that the North-South interconnector could not be put underground. This is despite the Government’s paying big money to an independent commission which stated that it could be put underground and after the fact that similar kV lines from Rush to Batterstown in County Meath run underground. We were told initially that the Minister said that it would not be included in the current review. I have some sympathy for the Minister because the Taoiseach may have pulled the rug from under his feet, after speaking to some of his backbenchers, and disregarded a Cabinet agreement on the North-South interconnector.

An EirGrid planning application is being withheld, or held back, until the independent review decides how to proceed. I stress that the North-South interconnector’s material impact on the citizens of the counties it goes through will be no different from that of any of the other projects going through the country. Not including it in the review is shockingly unfair to the citizens of that area. The North-South interconnector, Grid West and Grid Link projects have the same challenges and issues. They should be afforded the same level of analysis. I have heard the talk of urgency in that the North-South interconnector project is further advanced - some have stated that it is 97% there. This is not true. It is at planning inquiry stage, exactly as it was almost five years ago. EirGrid withdrew the planning application from this project in the middle of the oral hearing in 2010 because of a lack of thoroughness in its submission. Where is EirGrid's urgency in that process? A total of 97% of landowners along the route of the North-South interconnector have stated that they will never allow EirGrid onto their land to proceed with this. This has major implications for the opportunity for this project to proceed in a timely fashion. We are nowhere near 97% of the way through this process.

It has also been stated that there have been two previous reports on the North-South interconnector. These reports, however, did not tackle the proper construction cost and route identification, neither did they include the cost-benefit analysis to cover all the associated costs outside the technical and construction costs. We should make sure that we proceed in that manner.

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Pat Rabbitte)

I have appointed an independent panel of experts, chaired by Mrs. Justice Catherine McGuinness, a former judge of the Supreme Court, to decide terms of reference for comprehensive, route-specific studies of fully underground and overhead options for EirGrid's Grid Link and Grid West projects.

The panel will ensure that the studies are complete, impartial, objective and comparable. Both the overhead and underground options will be published side by side, in objective and comparable terms, before consideration is given to appropriate next steps. On the North-South transmission line, the situation is different. Planning for this project has been under way for the past ten years. A planning application has already been submitted for the part of the project in Northern Ireland and that planning process is in train.

Detailed studies have already been conducted, most recently by the independent international commission of experts appointed in July 2011. A route-specific underground analysis was conducted by PB Power, which found that the cost of undergrounding would significantly exceed the cost of the more usual overhead cables. The PB Power analysis was considered and confirmed by the independent commission, which estimated that the cost of undergrounding would be at least three times that of overhead cables.

The North-South transmission line is a critical and strategically urgent transmission reinforcement and is of vital importance in the broader North-South context. As well as reinforcing the grid in the north-east region of this State, the transmission line will be vital to maintaining the security of electricity supply for Northern Ireland into the future. I met with my Northern Ireland counterpart, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Ms Arlene Foster MLA, to discuss the very real security of supply concerns that would arise for Northern Ireland from any significant delay in progressing this project, and to assure her of our continued commitment to timely delivery.

I have previously said I recognise the public would be reassured if they knew that the overhead and underground options for North-South were both investigated and that the published studies are sufficient to enable a similar comparison be made by An Bord Pleanála in deciding on the merits of this planning application.

When I met Mrs. Justice McGuinness I accordingly asked her to consider what work, if any, the panel might usefully undertake to establish whether there has been parity of treatment between the North-South project in terms of the work already undertaken and the issues the panel will examine in respect of Grid Link and Grid West. Mrs. Justice McGuinness has since convened the first meeting of the panel and she has undertaken to raise with it what, if anything, it can do to help.

Another very relevant factor is that the North-South line has been designated at EU level as a 'project of common interest', one of 248 key trans-European energy infrastructure projects listed as such. It seems now to be clear, although I have yet to receive formal confirmation that, because of this status, the planning application will be subject to enhanced principles for public participation, which are set out in EU Regulation 347 of 2013, published in April last year. It is too early to say to what extent this enhanced form of public participation in the planning process - which I stress will apply to the North-South project alone - might meet the concerns of the public and, perhaps, make separate and additional deliberations by another body both unnecessary and otiose.

Deputy Peadar Tóibín

I remind the Minister that we are also committed to the timely delivery of the North-South interconnector but not in its current format. The Minister mentioned it has taken ten years to get the planning levels to this point. The nub of the problem is that the current conflict is leading to delays and each year of delay costs tens of millions of euro. The Minister also mentioned the two reports. If they are relevant to the North-South interconnector they are also fully relevant to the other projects overhead around the State, which have exactly the same issues. One of the key differences in the expert panel the Minister has put together is that it has been given the latitude to develop its own terms of reference and will include the full comparative analysis of underground versus overhead. This option was not available for the other report whose terms of reference did not allow it to study costs other than potential technical costs, in other words, the hundreds of millions of euro costs caused by the drop in property and land prices in the area.

The sense of urgency that the Minister mentioned should also be afforded to the other projects. If they are urgent we should seek a process to allow them to proceed without replicating what has happened in the case of the North-South interconnector which has gone on for ten years. We need to develop a framework model to restore public confidence and participation in this process. The exclusion of the North-South interconnector does nothing for public confidence. We all need and want to see a conclusion to this process but we want it to be based on fact rather than the current system.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte

Deputy Tóibín adopts a conciliatory tone of support for an interconnector but he has a very funny way of supporting it because effectively he is opposing it. It is a considerable parliamentary talent to be able to present obstruction and opposition in reasonable tones. Some mornings I wake up and hope I live long enough to see Deputies Tóibín and Mary Lou McDonald being given responsibility for doing something, as distinct from talking up opposition to everything.

This project has been planned for ten years. Deputy Tóibín says he accepts there is urgency around it.

If he does not accept it, if he talks to his colleagues in Northern Ireland where they have real concerns about security of supply in the not too distant future, they will reinforce the point of view for him.

A route specific analysis was undertaken by PB Power for Eirgrid and there was the international commission to which the parties that comprise the current Government committed. It was carried out by experts from Scandinavia and Belgium and their conclusions are in the public domain. All I can say at this stage is that we should leave it to Mrs. Justice McGuinness to opine. I have explained that I have put the case to her and she, in turn, has undertaken to examine with her expert independent panel what, if anything, they can do to assist in this situation because it appears that the Deputy and I are agreed that the country needs an interconnector that is fit for purpose and that, which not being in place, is costing between €20 million and €30 million per annum. There is some urgency attaching to this matter, particularly in Northern Ireland, and we have to let the process in place work itself out.

Marine Resources

Deputy Noel Harrington

I welcome the funding allocation the Minister announced recently which will go a long way towarding repairing many of the piers and quays and harbour infrastructure damaged and also the €1.5 million in funding announced to alleviate the losses incurred by some inshore fishermen through the loss of shrimp and lobster pots and other gear.

I am pleased to report that in the past day or two much of the fishing fleet that had been tied up for so long finally put to sea but a problem remains. Many of the fishermen who will go to sea today will not be in a position to catch many fish for the next few days, perhaps even for a week, because of the swell. Effectively, the nets are hopping along the bottom of the sea. This will make for a very poor fishing trip but desperation has forced them out in relatively safe and good weather. I wish them well. I am a little pessimistic, but that is the reality as relayed to me. Even when they do make a catch, it will be some weeks before they receive any remuneration for it. The reality is that it takes a couple of weeks for the cheque to arrive in the post. It will take at least eight to ten weeks for some fishermen solely because of the bad weather.

Allied with this, the Minister is aware of the challenging quota issue in the whitefish sector. Unfortunately, some fishermen have not had the benefit of a remuneration package or a cheque in the post since October. That aside, I want to ascertain if it is possible to come up with a compensation scheme for fishermen, many of whom will go on a trip of up to five days. Some of those heading for the Porcupine Bank to fish for prawns could be taking a 15 day trip to earn a wage to put food on the table for their families. A compensation scheme was initiated about 20 years ago but it was so badly handled by the previous Administration that Members of this House could claim money. That was a poor reflection on that Administration and there are those in the fishing industry who criticise that scheme. They will say it was inefficient, poorly administered and not targeted, but the position has changed. The regulations in the administration of sea fisheries have been tightened and a scheme could be easily targeted at those worst affected by the recent bad weather.

I raise this issue also in the context of the much publicised comments made by a French MEP who publicly stated there might be access through the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, EMFF, under Article 33(c)(1). Even though it has not yet been fully signed off on, it may well be a provision through which this country could make an application for funding. I would be grateful if the Minister confirmed that the Department and his officials were considering making such an application. If not, will he consider providing for some compensation scheme for hard-pressed fishermen and their families along the coast? We have heard calls from our colleagues in the North of Ireland who are also affected by weather issues. I look forward to hearing the Minister's comments.

Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Simon Coveney)

I thank the Deputy for raising this genuine issue. I know that he comes from the heartland of the whitefish fleet in Castletownbere and this is primarily a whitefish fleet issue. We have tried to do what we can within the rules and regulations. That is why, for example, in terms of a Government response, we have committed nearly €9 million to repair over 100 harbours and piers around the coastline and also nearly €1.5 million for fishermen who have lost gear, in the form of pots, and will have to bear the cost of replacing it. We will provide capital grant aid of about 40%. However, that is no of consolation to those involved in the whitefish sector who are looking to catch in the months of January and February a quota allocated in these months.

In terms of the EMFF, the truth is that it has not been signed off on yet and we do not know how much money Ireland will be allocated. It would be naive and foolish of me to look to spend money when we do not even know how much we will have to spend and I do not have access to it. Some have been calling on me to do this and deal with the issue retrospectively in six or eight months' time when we hope people will be fishing and have had a good middle of the year.

I am anxious to do something practical to help people. We sat down in the Department today to examine what we could do. We have looked at the figures for the amount of fish caught in the whitefish sector in January and to date in February. The figures for the pelagic sector are quite impressive. There has been a very significant landing of mackerel and horse mackerel. Some 40,000 tonnes of mackerel and 18,000 tonnes of horse mackerel have been landed, primarily in Killybegs, in the north west, but on the whitefish side the story has been very difficult. Many boats have not been out since mid-December. About half of the whitefish quota allocated was caught in January and probably less than this has been caught so far in February.

We are looking to convene a special meeting of the quota management advisory committee which essentially comprises representatives of the industry and my Department to look at a significantly increased allocation for the remainder of February and next month in order that, as fishermen start to have a weather window, they could catch much more fish than they would otherwise be alllowed to catch and in that way try to compensate them for what happened in the first six weeks of the year which proved very difficult for them. Fishermen will, rightly, tell me that there is a real problem in that when there is very bad weather, for safety reasons they cannot go out and as a result have no income. If I had access to a fisheries fund and was allowed to provide some income support, that is something we would examine.

I spoke to my colleague, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, this morning. The Department of Social Protection has a facility to provide income support within the fishing industry under a number of schemes, in particular the fish assist scheme.

I recognise that is somewhat limited for many people because of the difficulties they have with access and the assessment procedure. Given that fishermen have gone out today and yesterday, I want them to be able to catch more fish. I hope the weather window lasts so they can earn a living. We will allow them to catch more fish than they would otherwise catch for the remainder of February and next month to make up for the fact that they have caught only half of the quota allocated to them in the whitefish sector thus far this year. I hope that will allow them to catch up in terms of income after a difficult start to the year.

Deputy Noel Harrington

I welcome the Minister's proposal for allocating extra quota over the next six weeks. Fishermen do not want to go cap-in-hand to anybody. It is a proud industry, albeit a difficult one, and they do not want to look for funding. However, most of them are now living on credit and the goodwill of businesses in their areas. We need to have a debate on the fish assist scheme because it is far from perfect with respect to fishing. I am increasingly convinced that issues of social protection, combined with evolving policy on days at sea for the demersal or whitefish fleet, will give rise to some form of family income supplement instead of fish assist. These individuals are self-employed and even though they are not fishing it does not mean they are not working. They may not be earning but they still have to respond to their skippers' requests to keep their vessels and gear maintained. They are working every day of the week they are ashore but they have no prospect of being paid in the next couple of weeks. I look forward to seeing how the extra allocation of quota will be divided. I hope it will take account of when prices are optimal and that the extra quota will not have a depressing effect on prices.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I share the Deputy's concerns. Many people do not understand how the fishing industry works. Those who work on a trawler receive a percentage of the catch rather than being paid a salary as such. Essentially, they are sole traders working on somebody else's boat, with the result that they do not have easy access to social welfare without a time-consuming assessment procedure. We need to consider issues of income protection for people who are committed to the fishing industry. The sector also employs a considerable number of non-Irish nationals who work as deckhands on fishing boats. Issues arise in this regard which we also need to consider. I started a conversation with the Minister for Social Protection this morning about income issues in the fishing industry, and we will continue that conversation. In the meantime, however, I want to give a strong signal that we are going to hold a special quota management meeting this Friday to significantly increase the amount of quota that boats in the whitefish sector will be able to catch for the next six weeks so that they can catch up, from an income and cashflow point of view, as long as the weather permits. If the weather window does not persist we will have to consider other ways of supporting the families concerned.

Beef Industry

Deputy Michael McNamara

In responding to the previous Topical Issue, the Minister discussed the precarious existence of fishermen. I take this opportunity to draw attention to the increasingly precarious existence of Irish farmers due to prices. The volatility of milk prices has been well ventilated but we are also seeing great volatility in beef prices, particularly bull beef prices. I discussed this issue over the weekend with Deputy Ann Phelan, who wanted to partake in the present discussion but unfortunately had to attend another meeting.

I understand the Minister recently met representatives of the IFA to discuss this issue. As he will be aware, the price for bull beef has fallen by €150 to €250 per head since feeding started this year. This is now beginning to have an impact on beef prices more generally. The number of livestock killed per week currently stands at approximately 31,000, and we are edging towards the targets set out in Food Harvest 2020, but two years ago when the targets were being set, farmers did their part by retaining bulls, including Friesian bulls, and meeting the cost of feeding them. They are now paying the price, however, because they are losing money on every head of livestock they hold. This calls into question some of the general targets in Food Harvest 2020. If the result of increasing our beef kill to 31,000 per week is a fall in prices, farmers will be worse off as a result of ramping up production.

I should point out that I am a farmer. I finish cattle, although I am not a winter finisher. The prices obtained in September for cattle finished on grass were higher than the prices beef farmers are now getting for finished steers. As the Minister will be aware, the cost of finishing cattle in the winter is much higher. Farmers are taking losses on cattle they are finishing. I realise there are no easy answers to this problem. The factories will say there is no market for all of the bull beef produced, but farmers were encouraged to finish these bulls. If there is no market, it raises the question of why they were encouraged to finish them. Over time greater efforts will be needed to find markets for these bulls, but in the short term I encourage the Minister to call a meeting of producers, the IFA and the factories to see what can be done to ensure the ongoing viability of the beef sector. Farmers took losses across the board last year. We had an excellent summer but last winter was difficult. Farmers cannot take another winter of losses without the beef sector being damaged.

Deputy Simon Coveney

I thank Deputy McNamara for raising this important issue. I spent considerable time discussing the issue with the IFA this afternoon. The value of Irish beef exports was estimated at almost €2.1 billion in 2013. This export performance, which was based on a wide portfolio of customers, has contributed significantly to higher returns for Irish beef in recent years and reflects the success of Bord Bia's marketing strategy and its focus on the key attributes of Irish beef, namely, environmental sustainability, grass-based production systems, full traceability, quality assurance at all stages of production and superior eating quality. I am committed to developing a policy framework that fosters innovation and promotes efficiency and improved performance at all levels of the beef supply chain.

Aggregate cattle supplies at Department-approved meat plants to early February 2014 are up 7% on the corresponding period in 2013, with strong increases recorded in the steer, heifer and cull cow categories. This higher throughput has led to factories giving preference to certain types of stock that are better suited to the requirements of their retail customers.

Prices for prime steers and heifers have remained relatively stable but the young bull trade is challenging at present as age and weight issues continue to affect demand. However, I note that the young bull kill increased by 60% between week one and week six of 2014. The Irish beef sector is hugely dependent on exports and needs to ensure that it is producing efficiently for overseas markets.

One of the main difficulties in marketing young bulls older than 16 months is that these animals are outside the specifications preferred by the UK market. This is a major disadvantage at present because the UK market has effectively become the highest-priced beef market in the EU and it is where we sell most of our beef.

Delays in young bull slaughtering undoubtedly put pressure on producer profit margins but neither I nor any agriculture Minister can interfere in a trade that is cyclical in nature and prone to short-term price fluctuations. Of course, I am entirely sympathetic to those farmers facing difficulties in getting their cattle slaughtered at a price that will allow them any margin at all. In our discussions today, I gave a commitment to ask the CEOs of the meat companies concerned to come into the Department to have a blunt conversation to find a way forward that farmers can accept as fair and that factories can maintain an acceptable margin on, and I hope to do that within the next day or two.

It is the responsibility of the industry - in the first instance, processors and farmers working together - to manage the type and volume of cattle being brought to market so that the supply chain operates for the benefit of both parties and does not undermine the viability of bull beef production systems for either winter finishers or suckler farmers. I understand that producer and meat processor representatives have recently engaged in dialogue with some initial progress being made, but I can vouch for the fact that there is much more progress required in this area.

I fully recognise that we need to maintain confidence in the beef sector and earlier this month I announced the operational details of an investment package worth up to €40 million to beef farmers in 2014. This package will include €23 million for the beef genomics scheme, €10 million for the beef data programme, €5 million for the beef technology adoption programme and €2 million in residual payments under the suckler cow welfare scheme. That being said, we have a genuine problem in the bull beef sector which is now translating into a problem in steer beef and heifer beef also. Producers, that is, farmers, are growing ever more frustrated by this. I will do what I can to assist in the process but, ultimately, both parties concerned will have to find an acceptable solution moving forward.

Deputy Michael McNamara

I greatly welcome the fact that the Minister acknowledges there is a problem and that he will do what he can. He mentioned that there was an increase in bull beef killed in the first weeks of this year but no doubt part of the reason for that was that, normally, beef prices increase in the run in to Christmas, this year they did not and many farmers were holding on in the hope that the prices would inevitably increase although they still have not done so. The factories are aware there is a glut out there and they intend to take advantage of it. That is one side of the coin.

The State has consistently stepped up to protect the sector because it is hugely important, and a facet of that sector is the factories. When the factories were in trouble last year with the horses, we stepped up. The Dáil was reconvened during the summer to protect one group which now enjoys a dangerously dominant position in beef, both here and in the United Kingdom, which is a considerable market.

The Minister mentioned that retailers are not interested in this type of beef, and that is true. The unhealthy power that retailers, particularly the large multiples, enjoy is something that we have worked on in the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I note Deputies Doyle and Deering are here today and we all put a great deal of work into that. Not surprisingly, there has been a certain backlash from lobbyists and other groups. Those retailers have an unhealthy power to determine and, ultimately, they can decide that they will increase or drop prices whereas farmers have to plan two or three years ahead. As I stated, farmers made plans a year or two years ago to increase bull beef production because they were told that was the thing to do and now they are losing money because of it.

Notwithstanding all of that, I greatly welcome the fact that the Minister is calling in the CEOs of the processors to a meeting. I would ask whether he would consider bringing in a farmers' representative to that meeting as well, if that is feasible.

In the longer term, I would ask is there a way to find markets. I welcome the fact that there is a live trade being opened up through Stena but we need to increase the live trade to third countries outside of the EU. Every calf we export live, if it is exported to European markets, we face as competition to one that we rear in Ireland whereas if we can get them out to third country markets it is a different matter entirely. However, I welcome what the Minister has done.

My last suggestion, which may seem a little silly and many might find funny, applies to all Ministers. There are many of them going abroad. Maybe one item on each of their agendas should be whether there is a market in the state they are visiting for bull beef because, as the Minister stated, it is a particular market. British retailers, in particular, which are important customers for Irish beef, are not interested in it but that does not mean that there cannot be markets somewhere in the world, maybe even in Sochi, for bull beef. Who knows?

Deputy Simon Coveney

Nobody talks up the beef sector more than I do.

Deputy Michael McNamara

Absolutely.

Deputy Simon Coveney

Every time I go abroad I talk about beef access.

Deputy Michael McNamara

I refer to all the other Ministers.

Deputy Simon Coveney

Last year we got Japan, Lebanon and the Gulf states open. We got live exports to North Africa, which is a difficult market to manage. Even today, I spent half my meeting with the Chinese ambassador talking about beef access into China. In addition, we are pushing to get access into both the United States and Canada this year. We are expanding the spread of beef markets that we can access and we have a mature and street-wise group of companies that can take advantage when those markets open.

I agree with Deputy McNamara. We need to have an alternative outlet for farmers, the primary producers, if they feel they are not getting a fair price from the factories here in Ireland, and that is where live cattle exports come in. However, my preference would be that we would minimise live cattle exports. It needs to be there as an option, but what we want is to be getting a good price here in Ireland and employing people in processing and adding value to meat here before it is exported. That is where the maximum dividend is. As many farmers would say, however, it is important to have a live cattle export trade to keep factories honest.

There is a specific issue around beef prices in the United Kingdom versus Ireland. That is because the UK has become a separate market to the rest of the European Union in terms of prices. Last year we were at 106% of EU beef prices, which is unusual. Up until a couple of years ago, we would have been probably below 95%. Irish beef is selling at a premium across the European Union, above the price of most other European beef. That is not the case in the UK because consumers there are choosing UK beef and are willing to pay more for it. We have a particular issue with that in terms of labelling, etc. This problem is not simply solved by a live cattle export trade to the UK because factories in the UK do not want to kill Irish animals. They want to kill British animals and label them as British beef. They want to import Irish beef and label that as Irish beef. With Irish-reared and British-slaughtered beef there is a confusing message on the label which is not what retailers want. There is an issue here that we are trying to address as best we can. There is also an issue with new restrictions that are being introduced in terms of slaughtering in Northern Ireland of animals that have been reared south of the Border, which is another issue.

On the specifics of the bull beef issue which I accept is a big issue for farmers, 20% of our specialist beef is bull beef and we need to find an outlet for that. I will do what I can to work with the factories to facilitate a more acceptable solution than is currently available for farmers but I cannot perform miracles. There is ultimately a marketplace that decides here what it wants and what it is willing to pay for.

Maternity Services

Deputy Dara Calleary

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter, as well as thanking the Minister for Health for coming in to reply. According to The Connaught Telegraph, a report commissioned by the HSE conducted by the Dublin-based firm, Health Partnership, is examining maternity services in the west-northwest hospitals group. The initial first draft of the report is recommending closure of the units at Castlebar, Sligo and Roscommon, and the centralisation of maternity services into University Hospital Galway and Letterkenny General Hospital. As the Minister can imagine, that has caused considerable distress so the matter needs to be clarified urgently.

The HSE has confirmed that the review is under way but has still not made any report. The HSE subsequently said that there was a preliminary report. The HSE has issued a number of different press statements, so maybe that can be clarified. There was a preliminary report but this recommendation was not included in it.

I am asking the Minister to clarify a number of issues. In 2012, the last year for which I have full figures, Mayo General Hospital had 1,788 births. It is a busy maternity unit. The Minister knows the geography of Mayo well and his roots are there. A round trip to Galway from Belmullet or Erris is over 300 miles. Some weeks ago, somebody travelling from Achill experienced a difficulty and had to go to their local GP who, luckily enough, had the skills to deliver a child in Mulranny. The geographic difficulties are significant in the area and there is a need for access to maternity services. Mayo General Hospital provides a quality service in its busy maternity unit. The staff in the unit are renowned for their excellent work. They are deeply caring and there is a huge level of community trust in their abilities, as there is in the other hospitals.

How many reports are there and will the Minister publish the preliminary report? What are the terms of reference for the overall examination and will the Minister publish them? What level of public consultation will there be with GPs and local representatives? What is the date for this report to be delivered?

Deputy John O'Mahony

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this matter for debate and also thank the Minister for his attendance. The worst thing one can have is speculation started by leaks, which is suddenly taken as being the truth. I firmly believe that is the case here. The suggestion that Mayo General Hospital, Portiuncula and Sligo will have their maternity units closed is totally off the wall. I have spoken to many people who have attended those maternity units and they have nothing but praise for the care and attention they received from staff.

As Deputy Calleary has said, there were over 1,700 births in Mayo General Hospital in 2012 - a figure that has grown from 1,200 at the turn of the millennium. The size of County Mayo is relevant also. In recent times we have centralised many services at Mayo General Hospital, including the renal dialysis unit, which means that patients can be treated in Castlebar rather than having to travel to Galway.

I presume that there is absolutely no truth in the latest report but it needs to be nailed now. We have heard a lot of good stories about Mayo General Hospital, including treatment for renal dialysis and cystic fibrosis. In addition, there are plans for palliative care between the Mayo-Roscommon hospice in conjunction with the HSE. Only yesterday, the hospital was named as one of the top performers in meeting targets for treating people in accident and emergency within nine hours. This is despite the fact that the hospital has taken extra patients as a result of the accident and emergency unit closing down in Roscommon. By any measure, Mayo General Hospital has performed well. It is important, however, that this matter is not made into a political football. We do need these matters to be clarified.

Minister for Health (Deputy James Reilly)

I welcome the opportunity to provide reassurance regarding the future delivery of high quality and safe maternity services in the west of Ireland. I thank both Deputies for having raised this issue.

Recent reports appear to suggest that some hospitals within the west-northwest group, including Mayo General Hospital, are to lose their maternity services. These reports are purely speculative and, as such, unhelpful. I fully recognise that such unsubstantiated reports are a cause for concern for patients and staff, and I regret any upset which may have been caused.

Maternity services in the west-northwest hospitals group are under review but, let me be clear, no decisions on reconfiguration will be taken in that context. The position is that the review arises from the implementation of the recommendations of the HIQA report into the death of Savita Halappanavar.

In addition, the Higgins report on the establishment of hospital groups, requires that each hospital group prepare a strategic plan for service configuration, consistent with national objectives for the delivery of patient services. These reports provide the backdrop for the review currently under way in each hospital in the west-northwest hospitals group, including the maternity units at Mayo General Hospital, University Hospital Galway, Portiuncula Hospital Ballinasloe, Sligo Regional Hospital and Letterkenny General Hospital. The review is in the early stages and will take some months to complete.

Maternity services in all parts of the country will be subject to review and evaluation this year as part of the development by my Department of a new national maternity strategy. The development of this strategy is currently under way and will determine the optimal configuration of maternity services to ensure that women in Ireland have access to safe, high quality maternity care in a setting most appropriate to their needs. It is the intention to publish the strategy this year.

Deputies can be assured that any decision on maternity service reconfiguration will be considered in the context of the national strategy and, therefore, on a national rather than a local basis. No decisions on service reconfiguration will be implemented without the agreement of my Department and certainly not in advance of the publication of the proposed national maternity strategy.

Developing the strategy will provide us with the opportunity to take stock of current services and identify how we can improve the quality and safety of care provided to women and their babies. The strategy will ensure that our services are fit for purpose and in accordance with best available national and international evidence well into the future.

Deputy Dara Calleary

I thank the Minister for his reply. I accept that no decision on reconfiguration will be taken in a regional context, but the Minister is opening up the reconfiguration issue in a national context. What stage is this national maternity review at and what is the timeline? Will it be delivered in the Minister's time in office? What are its terms of reference?

The Minister of State, Deputy Ring, said that on his watch, and that of the Taoiseach, nothing will happen to maternity services at Mayo General Hospital. Given the strong track record, level of throughput and excellence of care both there, in Sligo and in the other hospitals concerned, can the Minister give a guarantee on maternity services in the context of this review?

Deputy John O'Mahony

I welcome the assurances given by the Minister but I wish to reiterate that all this speculation is unfair. I welcome any reviews that will increase or improve on the already great care that is provided in Mayo General Hospital. I have seen at first hand the wonderful care that is given. Unless we nail it now, this kind of scaremongering is damaging for staff morale as well as causing worry for expectant mothers. It is totally at odds with what we are hearing on the ground from our constituents about the care that is provided.

A family member of mine who is working abroad will be flying back to Ireland to have her baby at Mayo General Hospital in the next few months. We need to ensure that maternity services will continue at that hospital.

Deputy James Reilly

I wish to reiterate that the HIQA report into the care and treatment provided to the late Savita Halappanavar recommended that as a priority maternity services should be reviewed, and a national maternity services strategy should be developed and implemented.

I have accepted that recommendation. The proposed national maternity strategy will determine the optimal configuration of maternity services to ensure women in Ireland have access to safe, high-quality maternity care in a setting most appropriate to their needs. The Department will oversee the development of the strategy, which will be informed by our national expertise as well as international expertise and analysis of maternity and gynaecological service configurations. The project is currently being scoped and it is expected to be published later this year.

Deputy Dara Calleary

Is that the full report?

Deputy James Reilly

Yes. In December 2011, I announced new management arrangements for two groups of hospitals in the west and midwest, Galway University Hospital, incorporating Merlin Park, and Portiuncula, Ballinasloe and Roscommon hospitals, were placed within a single management structure led by a single chief executive officer, Mr. Bill Maher, who is responsible for group performance. The hospital group has a single clinical governance model, one budget and one employment ceiling. We are trying to devolve as much authority as possible locally in respect of budgets, staffing and recruitment. However, no local review will supplant the national maternity review and no local decisions can be in conflict with national policy. National policy will determine matters. Mayo General Hospital joined this group.

I agree with Deputy John O'Mahony that this scaremongering is unhelpful and undermines confidence in the hospital and the staff. A great service is available in Mayo General Hospital, in particular, and in the other hospitals and it is one they have every right to be proud of. I am here to reassure people that there is no plan to close maternity hospitals.

Deputy Denis Naughten

The report is before the board today.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 18 Feb 2014