Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 4 Dec 2014

Vol. 860 No. 3

Priority Questions

Rail Services

Niall Collins

Question:

1. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport his plans to address the serious funding shortfall at Iarnród Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46392/14]

In the light of the recent statement by the chief executive officer of Irish Rail, Mr. David Franks, that the company needs an additional €100 million per year in funding, I have tabled this question to ask the Minister what his plans are concerning this matter.

Iarnród Éireann has incurred accumulated losses of over €148 million in the past six years.  This trend is unsustainable and being addressed on a number of fronts.

Payroll comprises 60% of the cost-base and savings had to be found.  I acknowledge the changes that have been accepted by workers on foot of the Labour Relations Commission's proposals of last September. The LRC also recommended that the cost management committee, involving both management and employee representatives, identify target savings on non-payroll items necessary to implement the company’s five year plan.

The Government has provided for substantial Exchequer investment in the rail network in recent years, despite the significant financial challenges, and is fully engaged with Iarnród Éireann and the National Transport Authority in examining the future funding requirements of the company to ensure a sustainable future. I have given a commitment to avoid further reductions in the public service obligation, PSO, funding. For the first time since 2008, the level of PSO funding for bus and rail services is to be maintained in 2015 at current levels. This commitment has now been achieved. 

It is also my intention, within the overall capital envelope available to me, to make a significant injection of additional funding in the public transport capital investment programme.  A large portion of the amount earmarked for public transport will be targeted at Irish Rail’s renewal investment required in the rail network which will contribute to securing a viable path for the company.

These measures are necessary components that will contribute to addressing the financial position of the company and the CIE Group.  The policy and funding framework must take account of what the Exchequer can afford, while providing clarity for the public and employees on the necessary measures to restore the company to viability.

The public needs clarity on the charging structure Irish Rail has in place for its customers, on which we need certainty. It is broadly accepted that prices cannot go any higher because otherwise the law of diminishing returns would potentially kick in and customers would walk away and seek alternatives. The Minister said previously that he was confident that the funding afforded to Irish Rail was enough, yet that seems to have been contradicted by Irish Rail. Given that there is some growth in the economy, does he consider that Irish Rail's funding should at least grow in line with the projected rate of economic growth and that the company should be allowed to progress on a pathway with increased funding to carry out the infrastructural upgrades required across the country?

It is important to put in context the figures about which we are talking in order that the Deputy and the House generally are aware of the choices we have to make. For example, in 2013, CIE received €408 million in current and capital funding from the Exchequer. Of this figure, €226 million was for the provision of PSO transport services. Therefore, the CIE Group, Irish Rail in particular, is already in receipt of a huge amount of needed public investment. During the years of the crisis the level of funding made available to the company declined. I have honoured a commitment that we would maintain the level of subvention made available to the company. I have recognised that there is a need to support the capital needs of the company, on which I will soon be bringing forward proposals.

I would like more detail on the Minister's last comment. He says he will be bringing forward proposals, but when will we have sight of them? Will it be a matter between the Minister and the company, or will the Oireachtas get to hear about it? Will the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications have an opportunity to discuss the proposals when they are brought forward with the Minister and the company?

We are dealing with a company which, for the first time in many years, is seeing an increase in the number of passengers using its services. This is in line with what we are seeing not just on rail but also bus and Luas services. Public transport is benefiting from, and contributing to, economic recovery. The economic environment within which these decisions must be made is changing. Nonetheless, we are talking about a substantial amount of support that has been made available to the company. Despite the changes made and the reductions in the level of subvention funding, we are still talking about a PSO figure for Irish Rail alone of €118 million in 2014. This is a significant amount of money. To answer the Deputy's question directly, my intention is to bring further proposals to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport and Communications. I have requested that this be done next week.

Irish Airlines Superannuation Scheme

Dessie Ellis

Question:

2. Deputy Dessie Ellis asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if he will seek a meeting with the Department of Social Protection with representatives of the deferred members of the Irish aviation superannuation scheme in order to plan for a resolution to avoid the large cuts these members are being asked to take in their pensions. [46498/14]

I ask the Minister to seek a meeting with the Minister for Social Protection and representatives of the deferred members of the Irish aviation superannuation scheme in order to plan for a resolution to avoid the large cuts these members are being asked to take in their pensions.

Resolution of the IASS funding difficulties is primarily a matter for the trustee, the companies participating in the scheme, the scheme members and the Pensions Authority. The trustee sought approval from the Pensions Authority for a funding proposal and requested me to commence legislative provisions to facilitate implementation, if approved. The trustee believes this is in the overall best interests of the members of the IASS.  This was also the view of the expert panel.

Following requests on behalf of deferred members that more funding be made available for this group, I engaged with the employers on the matter. However, it was clear that the funding proposed was the maximum that could be achieved.  Having considered the above and taking account of the significant deficit of €750 million, I signed the commencement order on 17 November.

I understand the Tánaiste who has overall responsibility for pensions legislation has met deferred members.  I met her and discussed their concerns.  I also met deferred members on an individual basis and plan to meet the deferred members' group shortly to set out my position.

I am conscious of the difficulties the funding proposals will cause for many members, but the risks that will arise for all members, the companies and the wider economy in the event of failure of this solution are even greater. I believe that the funding proposal put forward by the trustee offers the best possible outcome for all members, given the acute difficulties and unsustainable circumstances of the fund.

The long-service deferred members of the IASS are very upset that the Minister has decided to move on the implementation of the State Airports Act, which allowed for the restructuring of IASS pensions. The deferred members are now facing a loss of 50% of their pensions, which should not happen to anyone. The Minister is washing his hands of responsibility and blaming the trustees. If the Minister's Oireachtas pension was cut by 40% or 50% down the road, he would be up in arms. These people have taken the brunt of this. They were not properly represented on the original-----

A question, please.

Can the Minister not do something further on this? He should meet the Minister for Social Protection to come up with a solution. This is a viable company with money and other assets. These people should not be thrown to the wolves. Just because they are deferred members and their pensions have not kicked in yet does not mean they are not suffering the brunt of the cuts in many cases.

I have met individual members who have been affected by this. It is my intention to meet a representative number of the deferred members today to discuss the matter. I am very much aware of the personal difficulty that many of them face.

Alongside that, the pension fund now has a deficit of over €750 million. The funding made available to deal with the issue is €270 million, out of which €60 million is being set aside to deal with the needs of deferred members. That €60 million is an increase of €20 million from when the latest phase of the process began.

The Deputy mentioned my signing of the commencement order. What would the consequences have been if that order had not been signed? The trustees wrote to me requesting that this happen. If I had not signed that order, a fund that has a deficit of more than €750 million would have found itself in an unknown situation in which, I believe, the consequences would have been worse for all members of that fund.

The Minister has said that if he had not signed the order the whole scheme would have been in trouble. However, he should not sign something at the expense of one group of workers whose pensions have been cut by 40% to 50%. That is bad policy and sets a bad precedent. I am glad the Minister is meeting the deferred members and I hope he comes up with some solution. Surely money can be found somewhere to fill that gap. The Minister has said the Government is tight on funds and he has basically said it is up to the company - the trustees - to deal with it. This was originally a State company, and on that basis, surely the State has some responsibility.

This is a private pension fund. I am very much aware of the consequences that people are facing as a result of this. However, if I had not signed the commencement order, the Deputy would now be asking me why I had not done so. A pension fund with 15,000 members and a deficit of €750 million would have been facing unknown consequences. There would have been consequences for people who are already drawing on the pension fund. Other bodies, including the trustees and the Pensions Authority, would then have had to make a decision as to what to do.

This is a privately owned pension fund upon which a large number people are reliant. With the choices available to me, I am trying to salvage funding to deliver the best possible chance to people of having a pension in the future. I reiterate that it is a private pension fund. Is the Deputy suggesting that the taxpayer should make a contribution to that? If I had not signed the commencement order, the Deputy would be in here asking me why I had not done that and why a fund upon which so many people are reliant was facing an even higher level of risk than at the moment.

Offshore Renewable Energy Development Plan

Thomas Pringle

Question:

3. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport if, in conjunction with the offshore renewable energy development plan, he will sign up to the equal recognition of mariner certification and training, or design a course that will provide equivalence, to enable Irish fishermen to avail of work opportunities in the offshore renewable energy sector and help develop a service industry for which fishermen are exceptionally qualified, which will ensure that Irish mariners may avail of opportunities in Irish offshore renewable energy sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46391/14]

Ireland did not join the rest of Europe in signing up to the equal recognition of mariner certification and training. There are huge opportunities for Irish fishermen to seek alternative employment in offshore wind energy developments. We have our own offshore renewable energy development plan, published last year by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. It is important that the Marine Survey Office deal with this now to allow Irish workers and fishermen to avail of opportunities in the future.

My primary concern regarding maritime transport is safety. I must ensure the appropriate safety standards are in place, regardless of the particular sector involved.

Ireland applies the internationally recognised standards to work on vessels servicing the offshore renewable energy sector - the standards of the International Maritime Organisation’s International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers qualifications, often abbreviated to STCW. Particular training and certification is required to work in this sector, and it is open to anyone, including fishermen, to undertake the training and attain the requisite certification.

Courses leading to certificates of competency for various positions - for example, master, mate, officer of the watch or chief engineer - are provided mainly by the National Maritime College of Ireland. In addition, my Department approves a panel of training course providers for various ancillary STCW courses which lead to certificates of proficiency. The details of these providers and the training they offer is available in marine notice No. 33 of 2013 on the Department’s website, which was last updated on 26 June 2014.

There is a problem for fishermen in particular in availing of work in this industry. Many fishermen from Donegal work in Germany and Britain on offshore wind energy developments. They are highly experienced and are used to dealing with inclement weather conditions and manoeuvring smaller boats in those conditions. They are highly regarded, and many of them are doing such work. However, their qualifications in Ireland are not transferable abroad. The Marine Survey Office of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport could develop a course to provide that equivalency as an add-on rather than a standalone course. It would also allow Irish workers to avail of work in the proposed large offshore wind energy developments in the Irish Sea, which will have significant requirements for staff in construction and maintenance in the future. We need to ensure that Irish people are in a position to avail of those.

The Deputy asked about the provision of new courses. I will set up a meeting involving him and representatives in this area working in my Department to investigate what such courses could be.

In response to the Deputy's question, I checked the status of all the courses and certificates that are available. My Department has informed me that they all meet the requirements of the STCW convention. Because all of our certificates comply with IMO requirements, our current level of training and the certificates of our fishermen and marine employees are recognised across the world and are held in high regard.

When this was last examined, in August last, there were 518 holders of valid certificates of competency issued in Ireland across the different training courses that I have just mentioned. All of these levels of training and certification were held in high regard and allowed those who had this training to work across the world, because this level of training is recognised by the IMO. If Deputy Pringle is telling me there is a gap and that we should look at new training, I will directly engage with him on that and get more information from him on it.

I thank the Minister for that response. I will gather that information on the matter and get it to him. I look forward to moving forward on it.

One point that may be of assistance to Deputy Pringle is that an area I considered in response to his question was that of certificates of training that some other countries might deliver to their fishermen that do not meet the IMO template. I understand that in the United Kingdom there are some certificates and types of training that do not conform to that template in the way our own certificates do. This is something that the House of Commons transport committee has investigated, and it published a report in March last. The committee recommended that something that should be looked at is converging their training in those areas with the IMO needs to which I referred earlier. We are determined to ensure that any training we conduct or any new training that might be provided would continue to meet the needs of the IMO, because by meeting that need we can ensure that the qualifications are recognised by everybody. I suspect that might be a desire the Deputy would share, because he wants to get further employment opportunities for those on whose behalf he raises this. I will get more detail on the particular point the Deputy has raised with me in a meeting.

Sports Capital Programme Administration

Niall Collins

Question:

4. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the capital grants criteria for sports centres; the criteria for the transfer of capital allocations from one sporting organisation to another; the criteria for the way in which those sporting organisations spend those grants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46393/14]

Recently, the Minister of State, Deputy Ring, announced six regional projects to the tune of €200,000 each. Following that announcement, there was adverse media coverage which alleged that he was engaged in parish-pump-style politics, ensuring that a project in his own political backyard received funding. We all support all sporting organisations. They all need funding and they never have enough. The question was tabled merely to elicit the criteria used to allocate the funding that was announced.

I was pleased to announce a total of €40.5 million in allocations earlier this year under the 2014 round of the sports capital programme.

I am delighted that I have been able to secure the agreement of the Government for funding to enable me to announce a further round of the programme in 2015. This will be the third round of the sports capital programme since this Government came into office, and details will be announced when they are finalised. All applicants under the sports capital programme must first register with the online sports capital register, OSCAR, system. The terms and conditions for any programme are published in advance on the Department's website. Applications under each round of the programme are first checked to ensure eligibility.

Under the 2014 round of the programme, all eligible applications were initially assessed against five criteria, namely the likelihood of increasing participation or improving performance and availing of shared facilities, the level of socioeconomic disadvantage in the area, the technical merits of the project, the level of other funding available to the organisation, and the level of sports capital programme funding received in the past.

In some instances the Department permits a change of purpose or change of location in relation to a grant when asked to do so by a grantee. The sports capital programme does not generally permit the transfer of capital allocations from one organisation to another. It does, however, occasionally allow a change of grantee where the new grantee has title to the property and where the original grantee requests the transfer of the grant. Such applications are dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

The criteria for drawing down grants - for example, tax clearance, proof of payment, submission of valid paid invoices and completion of any necessary legalities - do not vary according to the type of facilities being funded, though naturally there are less onerous requirements for the purchase of equipment.

I did not ask the Minister of State the drawdown criteria or procedure. I asked him the criteria based on which public moneys were awarded to these six projects. We know how the sports capital programme works and how clubs register and apply.

In this instance, an outside agency, namely the Football Association of Ireland, FAI, was grant aided, and it appears from the reply that the FAI then decided who got what. What I am trying to find out is why the FAI picked the projects concerned, because these are public moneys. There does not seem to be any degree of transparency as to why the FAI selected these six projects over the many other projects. That is what we are asking. Why was it these six projects? Will the Minister of State give an undertaking to publish the criteria and assessment of these six projects, and, indeed, of all the other projects considered by the FAI, among which these six projects came top of the list in the priority order?

First, I want to make it clear that that is not the question that was asked of me on the Order Paper. In fact, my Department rang Deputy Niall Collins's party's spokesperson last Friday, at which time he did not know what question he was asking. It is difficult for me to answer a question when the Deputy himself does not know on the previous Friday what the question is.

On the question Deputy Niall Collins raised, since we came into office we have had special schemes every year. We had one for boxing, one for athletics and one for rugby, and this year we had one for the FAI, besides which we allocated €30 million for Páirc Uí Chaoimh. Those were all special allocations, and the FAI made an application. With regard to boxing, we gave the funding to the boxing body, it set up the criteria and it picked the grantees. With athletics, we gave funding to the relevant body and it picked the grantees. With the FAI, it picked the grantees.

Some newspaper ran out with sensational stories, but that newspaper would be far better off if the journalist came down and saw the facilities. For example, I will refer to one club. Deputy Niall Collins is talking about the club from my own town of Westport. That club paid €350,000 for land. If it had been here in Dublin, the local authority would have provided that land for them. Last year, it had to get rid of the girls' football teams because it did not have facilities. The club plays its home games in Castlebar and Ballyhean, away from its facilities. It never got a grant from the Department under any of the grant allocations made previously. The FAI selected the club, as it did the three clubs from Munster. Is Deputy Niall Collins objecting to the three from Munster? Is he objecting to the one from Clones? Is he objecting to the one from Mayo? I am surprised that Fianna Fáil would even think of being against the provision of facilities in rural areas in the regions. The situation in relation to this club is that a journalist ran off with a sensational story without checking the facts, and I challenge that journalist to come down to the club and see the 400 children who are playing football every weekend in our town and in our county.

The Minister of State is completely missing the point. He seems irritated and irate when asked in Parliament for a degree of public accountability.

He is. He has just had an outburst asking why anybody should question the reason public moneys were allocated to six projects. I stated at the outset that I do not begrudge Westport the funding. I do not begrudge any club funding. I merely asked Deputy Ring whether he would publish the criteria for the allocation of €200,000 each to these six projects.

That is public money and people are entitled to this information because the other organisations that did not receive the grant aid also are entitled to such information. It is wrong to suggest that anybody is against a club in the Minister of State's backyard or anywhere else. They are not but a degree of transparency simply is required in this regard.

Finally, I note that at the end of the Minister of State's statement, it was indicated the €1.2 million was coming out of next year's allocation. In his response, the Minister of State should state whether it is correct that if the Department was pre-spending next year's budget in announcing the €1.2 million for the six clubs through the FAI, it was pre-spending some of next year's money.

The criteria are simple. The FAI made an application, as did the athletics, boxing and rugby bodies. It set the criteria and picked the applicants, not me. The Government gave an allocation of €1.2 million to the FAI, just as it gave an allocation of €30 million to Páirc Uí Chaoimh and an allocation of €990,000 to boxing. They are the ones that set the criteria and that select the clubs. Were I to pick the clubs, I would be accused of being parochial.

However, the perception is there.

Sorry, please.

I am asking the Minister of State to deal with the perception and whether the criteria can be published.

Please Deputy. This is Question Time.

All the information can be given to the Deputy. The FAI made its application and the Government made a decision about giving the sum of €1.2 million. However, the FAI made the decisions.

Can the Minister of State publish how it arrived at them?

Whatever the Deputy wants. The information is in the Department and as the Deputy has received plenty of information from it, I am sure this information also can be found.

I merely am asking whether it can be published.

I acknowledge the Deputy is well briefed in the Department, which I also understand well. This is the way the system was and the allocations in respect of rugby, Gaelic games and the athletics track were no different. The Government made a special allocation to these organisations, which picked the grantees. That is the way it is and there is no hidden agenda. That is the way it was done and I wish to put on record that this was unlike the behaviour of the Deputy's party, whose Ministers on one day put a million euro into their own towns with the sports capital grant. I operated the sports capital programme on a pro rata basis and I hope that will never change again. I hope that no other Minister ever again will be able to do it other than on a pro rata basis.

I also will tell the people of County Mayo what the Deputy, as well as Deputy Calleary, think of them.

Top
Share