Vol. 867 No. 2
6. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his Department has costed recent policy proposals from Ministers including increased subsidies for child care, paid paternity leave and compensation for small business for increases in the minimum wage; if ministerial announcements regarding additional expenditure must comply with expenditure ceilings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5779/15]
This is an important issue given events that will happen in the next 12 to 14 months in the run-up to the general election. I want to ask the Minister whether he has costed and sanctioned recent policy proposals by a plethora of Ministers that would incur an extra cost to the Exchequer including subsidies for child care, paid paternity leave and compensation for small businesses for an increase in the minimum wage. We will discuss the difference between Ministers talking as Ministers and talking as party spokespersons who are electioneering, and the Minister might tell me where he sees the line between the two.
It is a very tricky question. Ministerial expenditure ceilings are decided by the Government within the context of the overall Government expenditure ceiling required to ensure that our fiscal targets are achieved, and have a statutory basis in the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 2013. We legislated for them. The multi-annual voted expenditure ceilings allow for greater transparency in the allocation of resources across Departments over a three-year horizon and facilitate the work of the Oireachtas in engaging with Ministers and their Departments their spending priorities.
The second comprehensive review of expenditure, CRE, was carried out last year. The objective of it was to provide Government with a set of options to re-align voted spending priorities in order to deliver key public services while continuing to meet our overall fiscal targets. All Departments made detailed submissions to my Department as part of the process. Based on these submissions and analysis carried out by my Department, the Comprehensive Expenditure Report 2015-2017 was published on budget day. It set out the multi-annual expenditure ceilings agreed by the Government for the three-year horizon.
I am aware that policy matters in the areas referenced by the Deputy, namely, child care, paternity leave and the minimum wage, are being considered by my colleagues in those areas in the context of their Departments’ missions and goals. Any specific proposals that might arise in these areas would be carefully and thoroughly examined and costed before deciding on their merits. Decisions would take account of the management of expenditure within the ministerial expenditure ceilings and the most up-to-date fiscal and economic advice.
In general, if a Minister makes a statement on one of these matters, do we ask the Minister whether he or she has included it in the expenditure ceiling for his or her Department over the coming three years or do we ask the Minister, Deputy Howlin, to validate it? I ask because, in January, a Minister announced that the public sector pension levy was likely to be reduced. On 13 January, another Government source suggested working parents were in line for tax breaks and subsidies for child care and promised a second free preschool year, while on 14 January another Government source suggested property owners were going to be encouraged to enter rent certainty leases and possibly get tax breaks for them. On 21 January, the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Ríordáin, said he was confident two weeks of paid paternity leave was coming and then the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, said a wage-led recovery including a minimum living wage of €11.50 per hour was also under consideration. Where are we with all this?
Like the Deputy, I read all these things with very great interest. We set out the economic horizons and I engaged with Ministers, who have great flexibility within their budget lines to reprioritise. However, it must be decided by the Government as a whole. People are entitled to debate these plans and, under the new budgetary system, I have encouraged such debates. The committees of the House should debate these challenging issues, such as child care. Should we have an additional preschool year? Should we have a different method of support? Is the current provision working? Then, we can cost any proposals that emerge and see how they fit in. I would not seek to stifle initiatives by colleagues to address real needs they perceive in their areas.
While I agree with the Minister, we need a broad debate on it to discuss the different perspectives. The Minister may be right from a political perspective to suggest that we discuss the concepts and ideas and then cost the best ideas to see if they are affordable. However, is it right to let the conversations and vague promises happen without any costing? The public would like to know how some of these lovely ideas might be paid for somewhere along the line. If a Minister goes to the trouble to make a specific announcement, he should be able to give some indication of whether it might cost €1 million, €10 million or €100 million and say it will be subject to financial conditions.
It would also be helpful if a cost was associated with these high-flying ideas.
I do not disagree with the Deputy at all; I think it would be helpful to know. Everybody is in favour of more services and so on, but we need to know their cost and how they will fit in to affordability. That is part of the anchoring of policy discussion in what is deliverable. As I said when I addressed the committee of which the Deputy is a member, we have established the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service as an independent service to evaluate the economic value of any proposal. That is being increasingly effective in producing independent analysis of service provision as it is, service provision internationally and service as it might be provided, anchoring it in economic reality. That is how we should look at it.
7. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the extent to which he remains satisfied that expenditure and reform targets and commitments continue to be achieved; the degree to which he expects the benefits accruing therefrom to be reflected in new and enhanced economic opportunities, including employment prospects arising from his Department’s programme in the past three and a half years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5744/15]
I have a somewhat similar question with a different aspect. I inquire as to the extent to which the various reform and expenditure targets and commitments continue to be achieved, and the degree to which the Minister expects these to reflect economic policy in the future with particular reference to benefits to the people.
The banking crisis in 2008 and subsequent recession had a profound impact on the public finances, as everybody in this House knows. The scale of the challenge facing both the economy and the public finances was considerable with gross voted expenditure being reduced from its peak of €63.1 billion in 2009 to €54 billion in 2014, a reduction of 14.4%.
The Government's priority has been to protect the vulnerable in society and support economic growth to the greatest extent possible during that process. Therefore, in implementing expenditure reductions, all Departments and agencies were required to seek savings, pursue efficiencies and manage within constrained budgets, often while meeting increased demand from the general public for services.
With the recovery in the economy and the improvement in the fiscal outlook, in deciding on expenditure allocations in the comprehensive review of expenditure, the Government has been able to provide for a year-on-year increase in expenditure. This expenditure increase is targeted at key areas such as health, social welfare provision and most of all social housing.
Our programme of public service reform has also made a vital contribution to ensuring that public services are delivered in a more efficient and effective manner. The efficiency and productivity measures the Government has introduced have played a fundamental role in mitigating the impact of the necessary expenditure reductions. We have made very strong progress on public sector reform to reduce costs and improve services, and this will remain a key element of our recovery strategy.
Returning stability to the public finances is a necessary prerequisite to creating an environment that encourages economic growth. The Deputy will be aware that economic growth in Ireland is now the highest in Europe and unemployment at the end of January was at 10.5%, down from its peak of over 15% in 2011. As a sign of confidence in the Irish market, employment at IDA Ireland-supported firms reached a new record of 175,000 in 2014.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House
With the improved economic and fiscal position, the Government is fully committed to correcting the fiscal deficit and to using our recovery wisely through retaining and augmenting the benefits from public service reform. As the fiscal situation continues to improve, we will look to build on the progress already made in returning the unemployed to work and ensuring that economic growth is supported.
I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive reply. I acknowledge the tremendous strides made in the past almost four years. Does he remain satisfied that the economy under his guidance and that of his colleagues will continue on its current trajectory with further benefit both in the public and private sectors?
I thank the Deputy for his remarks. We need to ensure that it does and the Government is determined to do so. Stability will be required. Instability exists outside our own environment and might have an impact upon us. We do not know what will happen, for example, in eastern Europe, particularly in Ukraine, and such factors have a destabilising effect.
We can control what we can do here and it is important that we maintain the successful policies of the past four years. The Central Bank has indicated that growth reached 5% last year. We expect growth of 4% this year and sustainable growth at that level for the following years. Unemployment is now at 10.5% and will be in single digits this year, please God. In 2011, we did not envisage that being achieved so quickly. Even the projections of the cost of debt servicing in 2011 which we had expected by now to be of the order of €11 billion annually is actually €7 billion because we have had four renegotiations of our debt. We have rolled up our sleeves and done the job of renegotiating all the debt issues. We have focused on growth and job creation. We obviously need to keep a firm hand on the tiller and the Government will certainly continue to do that.
Does the Minister foresee any particular issues that might present a threat to the continued progress of this economy?
I foresee two sets of issues. I have already mentioned one, the external environment. There are obviously uncertainties over eastern Europe, particularly Ukraine. There are uncertainties over the position of Greece and the future inclusion of the United Kingdom within the European Union. Those are matters over which we have very little control, but they may impact on us and we need to keep a very close eye on them.
There are also internal issues we need to address. We obviously need to maintain our discipline in public expenditure so that we can grow according to our capacity in a sustainable way and maintain confidence, which we have discovered in the past four years is one of the most important issues. It sounds intangible but for investors in Ireland confidence that we can do the job and will deliver according to our word is really important. The most important component of maintaining that is stability in government so that people know that the policy platform will be robust into the future.
As there is a minute left, I call Deputies McDonald and Lawlor. I ask them to be brief.
I could not let this go by, as the Minister congratulated himself on his achievements, without asking him to react to the following. On his watch, a third of our children now live in poverty and we have the highest level of low pay in the OECD, second only to the United States of America. On his watch, families, particularly those headed by single parents, eke out an existence and live in poverty. On his watch, the Government continues to take medical cards from children with very severe disabilities and life-threatening conditions, including cancer.
Deputy McDonald is being negative again.
He portrays this as a level of progress in the economy and rattles off his statistical data.
Sorry, Deputy-----
Added to that are the Government's additional charges, not least the water charges for which protesters are now being lifted, left, right and centre.
I asked the Deputy to be brief.
To introduce a level of balance into the record of the Dáil, it is only fair to record those matters as our Government colleagues have their love in.
I call Deputy Lawlor for a brief question.
I will be more positive than the last speaker-----
I am sure he will.
-----who was extremely negative up in the North of Ireland, if she remembers.
A question, please.
Some 20,000 public servants to be fired.
With regard to linking the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform with job creation and employment projects, will the Minister look at projects with high value-to-money ratios and prioritise them? I spoke to him previously about a certain project.
In response to Deputy Lawlor, he never misses the main chance. I understand exactly the project in which he is interested and I certainly will have regard to that.
I will deal briefly with Deputy McDonald's remarks. When the facts of the matter do not suit the case and do not suit the political argument-----
Those are the facts.
-----she uses generalisms. Medical cards are not being taken. There are more medical cards now than we ever had in our history. That is an undeniable fact. When we have the most strained pressures on our resources, we are providing more medical cards. We will provide free GP care to those aged under six and over 70.
I could give the Minister examples.
In terms of poverty, I do not know if the Deputy had a chance to look at the presentation given to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection two weeks ago. Almost uniquely, we have gone through the most difficult economic environment in our history while reducing inequality.
No other country - not Greece, Portugal or Spain - reduced inequality. That is because we sustained base social welfare payments, which have now increased as a proportion of total expenditure. I know these issues do not suit Deputy McDonald.
It does not suit me.
The notion that we have the lowest pay in the OECD is not true; we do not have the lowest pay. One can see what Greece is paying. It wants to increase its monthly minimum wage to something of the order of €750. Therefore, the progress we have made is remarkable. We have put people back to work and have stabilised our economic fortunes. Bluntly, had we followed the path mapped out by Deputy McDonald and her party leader, we would be in a crisis right now with mass unemployment and social unrest. Of course, there are those on the Opposition benches who would like us to be in that position.
Far from it.
8. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the role of his Department in the potential sale of the State's shareholding in Aer Lingus to IAG, the International Airlines Group. [5608/15]
There is no doubt that this is an absolute twilight zone because the Minister's protestations bear no link to the reality experienced by the public.
My question concerns the proposed takeover of Aer Lingus by IAG. Thousands of workers in north Dublin, Cork and Shannon are very worried about this proposition. According to media reports, the Labour Party is upset and worried about this also. There have been a few rumblings but nobody will take comfort from that, given that they seem to be capable of dealing with their rumblings and upset, and selling their consciences. Can the Minister tell us, and particularly the 5,000 Aer Lingus employees, what his Department's role is in the impending sale and takeover of Aer Lingus?
The Government's shareholding in Aer Lingus was one of the assets included in the State assets disposal programme approved by Government in 2012, for which I am responsible. Accordingly, my Department is represented on the interdepartmental steering group which is currently examining the issues arising from the recent approaches to Aer Lingus by IAG.
The steering group is chaired by the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, as the Department with policy responsibility for the sector, and also includes the Department of Finance, whose Minister holds the Government's shareholding in Aer Lingus for specific reasons, and NewERA. They are making a full evaluation of the proposals and those proposals will come to Government in due course.
I tabled a question to the Minister for Finance who, as the Minister, Deputy Howlin, correctly said, is the shareholder, but he would not even answer that question. He transferred it from the Department back to the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. What we have in the answer to this question is the idea of sharing responsibility or off-loading it, depending on what way one looks at it.
The workers involved, and, indeed, many business and tourist interests, may ask what interest IAG could possibly have for the Irish economy and workers in return for a paltry €300 million. In a company that is already returning new dividends annually, that amount would be sucked up pretty quickly. IAG has nothing positive to offer Aer Lingus. Its involvement is only concerned with expanding its own business interests. Despite any assurances on the Heathrow slots, they would not be worth the paper they are written on.
Will the Minister comment on the fact that when IAG took over Iberia, 5,000 people lost their jobs? A pro rata figure for Aer Lingus would be in the region of 1,200 jobs. Undoubtedly, senior executive decision-making would transfer to London with perhaps a small presence here in Dublin. Can the Minister comment on the economic impact of the loss of those jobs on the Exchequer?
The Irish Takeover Panel has deemed that Aer Lingus is now in an offer period. The panel's rules in regard to communications apply to all parties during this offer period. All parties, including the Government as a shareholder, must apply the highest standards of care to any statement on the matter. Specifically, shareholders must take care in any of their communications to avoid revealing any information that could potentially impact, either positively or negatively, on the Aer Lingus share price. We are a minority shareholder but other shareholders have rights. The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport has clearly said that we are a minority shareholder, and there are other shareholders.
IAG is entitled to make a bid. That bid is being evaluated and we will make a determination on the Government's shareholding in the best interests of the workers, the State, connectivity and all the matters that have been laid out in such detail by the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. The Deputy can be assured that the most careful consideration will be made of these matters before any decision is brought to Government.
Careful assurances of information that we are not party to, and opinions that we do not get to see, are becoming the mantra of this Government. It is just not good enough. If the Minister is not prepared to give us information on some of these things, maybe he could comment on the outstanding pension problem. There seems to be a belief that the IASS pension scheme issue has been resolved. The reality, however, is that last month, moneys were taken out of pensioners' pockets equating to about €500,000 per month from the local economy. People are not signing the waiver forms and legal action is pending.
While I appreciate the Minister has said he cannot give us any information that might impact upon the share price, although the share price is obviously being impacted upon already, and has been over the last period, perhaps he might comment on whether the outstanding pension debacle has been factored into the considerations or is there a naive belief that this issue has been resolved?
I am always amused by the Deputy's cavalier attitude to the law. I have indicated what the rules are and we are obliged to adhere to them. It is not a matter, like her views on the Constitution, that we can accept or reject it according to the vagaries of the day and the political advantage to be made. Government does not operate like that.
As regards the share price, the Deputy can be sure that nothing I have said will impact on it because I will confine myself to the strictures of the rules and the laws that exist.
As regards the second question on pension matters, that is a matter for which I have no responsibility.
9. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the status of the lifting of the public sector recruitment embargo as announced in budget 2015. [5782/15]
As Deputy Daly has said, there is a serious outstanding issue in terms of "deferreds", as they are called, and their pension entitlements which many have seen literally decimated. Even if it is not the Minister's direct responsibility, I urge him to familiarise himself with it because a grave injustice has been done to people who have given massive service to Aer Lingus. One could not countenance the sale of the State's share without considering that.
The Deputy should put her question, which has been called.
This question is about the lifting of the public sector recruitment embargo, as the Minister has announced.
As I stated in response to the earlier question, the moratorium on recruitment and promotion in the public service will be replaced this year with new arrangements, giving Departments delegated sanction for the management of staffing numbers. This will be subject to Departments remaining within binding pay ceilings and meeting ongoing efficiency and reform objectives.
Discussions are ongoing between my Department and all other Departments on the necessary structures and controls to govern the new delegated arrangements. Once agreement is reached on these, formal delegated sanction will issue and Departments will have the freedom to recruit and promote within the set pay bill ceilings.
The moratorium and the ECF, in tandem with our reform programmes, have helped to deliver a more effective and efficient public service, maintaining key service levels as overall staffing levels have reduced. However, as I have said previously, with the improvement in the public finances and growing demand for public services, the time is now right to return to a more normalised approach to the management of public service staffing and to give public service managers more flexibility to respond to service needs as they arise.
I very much welcome any move in respect of lifting or easing the recruitment embargo. We have all seen at first hand the negative effect of under-staffing, including the stress on staff themselves, and the consequences for service users.
Can we tease things out a little bit? The Minister says that the function of recruitment will be delegated to Departments which will have to operate within their budgetary ceilings. Can the Minister give an assurance that other standards will also be applied and that, for instance, there will be no so-called yellow pack recruitment? Will there be an adherence to established pay levels? Does the Minister envisage that outsourcing will form part of this new recruitment and staffing scheme?
Will the positions be part-time in nature or will they be full-time, permanent and properly paid?
The Deputy raised a number of questions. I have indicated previously that over and above matters such as pay savings and the capacity to make decisions at front-line level, there are overarching issues in respect of which we have taken a whole-of-government approach. I refer, for example, to the recommencement of recruitment to the Garda Síochána, the recruitment of 1,700 additional teachers, resource teachers and special needs assistants, SNAs, and the appointment of health sector specialists. Total public sector numbers increased by 1,400 last year. I have explained this in detail at Question Time on a number of occasions. What we are doing is recycling what I call the "reform dividend", that is, money we are saving by means of the implementation of the Haddington Road agreement, into meeting front-line needs. Deputies warmly welcomed this when I first indicated that we would do it. I hope to be able to continue to do that in order that it will not be simply a crude numbers issue and that we will identify the areas in which real pressure, which we may wish to address, exists. In the context of so-called yellow pack recruitment, as has been the case every step of the way since the Government took office, any decisions will be made in consultation with, and it is hoped with the agreement of, the public sector unions involved.
I take it that when the Minister commences discussions with the unions in the spring, it will not simply be a matter of dealing with pay levels and that he is open to negotiating in respect of the set of issues to which I refer. Two things must happen. First, there is a need for greater capacity within the sector. I do not know if the Minister would go further by acknowledging that the crude job of simply culling numbers in certain sections of the public sector had a very negative impact. Be that as it may, however, there is now a need for greater numbers. We also need an assurance that there will be appropriate terms and conditions for those who are to be recruited into the public service. I would like the Minister to indicate publicly now that he sees these as matters to be discussed with the unions when he enters negotiations with them in the spring.
Yes, those are the sort of matters that will be discussed. It will not simply be a matter of discussing pay. I am determined that we will retain the productivity gains that have been made in order that we might ensure sustainable public services into the future.
10. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of former Garda stations that were offered for sale on behalf of the Office of Public Works in 2013 and 2014; the total proceeds from completed sales; if any are currently offered for sale; the number that have been transferred to community use; the number that have been reinstated as operational Garda stations following closure in 2012; the number not currently in use; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5777/15]
This is a straightforward question. Will the Minister of State provide up-to-date information regarding the closures of Garda stations that were announced some time ago? How many stations have been sold, what were the total proceeds from such sales and for what have those proceeds been used? How many stations are currently on the market and how many have been transferred to either community use or to other State agencies?
The Office of Public Works' disposal policy with regard to non-operational or vacant Garda stations is first to identify if the property is required or suitable for alternate State use by both Departments or the wider public sector. If there is no other State use identified for a property, the OPW will then consider disposing of it on the open market, if and when conditions prevail, to generate much-needed revenue for the Exchequer. If no State requirement is identified or if a decision is taken not to dispose of a particular property, the OPW may consider community involvement, subject to detailed written submission which would indicate that the community or voluntary group has the means to insure, maintain and manage the property and that there would be no ongoing costs for the Exchequer.
No former Garda stations were offered for sale in 2013. Fifteen former Garda stations were sold at public auction during 2014 to a value of €1,335,000. The list is as follows:
|
No. |
Public Auctions |
Value of Sale € |
|
1. |
Mallow Road, Cork City |
260,000 |
|
2. |
Baldwinstown, County Wexford |
75,000 |
|
3. |
Cloone, County Leitrim |
50,000 |
|
4. |
Grangemockler, County Tipperary |
103,000 |
|
5. |
Newtowncashel, County Longford |
50,000 |
|
6. |
Lettermore , County Galway |
70,000 |
|
7. |
Inchigeela, County Cork |
55,000 |
|
8. |
Ballinure, County Tipperary |
100,000 |
|
9. |
Dundrum, County Tipperary |
90,000 |
|
10. |
Doon, County Limerick |
50,000 |
|
11. |
Finea, County Cavan |
56,000 |
|
12. |
Tullyvin, County Cavan |
45,000 |
|
13. |
Kilmessan, County Meath |
200,000 |
|
14. |
Longwood, County Meath |
76,000 |
|
15. |
Ballymore, County Westmeath |
55,000 |
|
Total |
1,335,000 |
A further six former Garda stations were offered for sale in 2014 by private treaty and are sale agreed. The Chief State Solicitor's office is finalising the contracts for sale. Seventeen stations have been assigned to local community groups. The list is as follows:
|
No. |
Garda Station |
Assigned to Community Group |
|
1. |
Ballinskelligs, County Kerry |
Coiste Forbartha na Sceilge |
|
2. |
Ballycastle, County Mayo |
Ballycastle Development Company |
|
3. |
Ballymote, County Sligo |
Ballymote Community Enterprises Limited |
|
4. |
Beaufort, County Kerry |
Beaufort Community Council |
|
5. |
Castletownshend, County Cork |
Castlehaven Community Association |
|
6. |
Cliffony, County Sligo |
Cliffoney Community Development Group |
|
7. |
Cootehall, County Roscommon |
Cootehall Community Development Group Ltd. |
|
8. |
Dromahair, County Leitrim |
Dromahair Community Group |
|
9. |
Kilgarvan, County Kerry |
Kilgarvan Tidy Towns Committee |
|
10. |
Mulranny, County Mayo |
Mulranny Community Futures |
|
11. |
Tourmakeady, County Mayo |
Coiste Cultur Teanga and Forbartha Thuar Mhic Eadaigh |
|
12. |
Bunbeg, County Donegal |
Gweedore Community Council |
|
13. |
Donard, County Wicklow |
Glen of Imaal Wicklow (Red Cross) Mountain Rescue Team |
|
14. |
Rush, County Dublin |
Rush Musical Society and Rush Tidy Towns |
|
15. |
Doonbeg, County Clare |
Doonbeg Community Development Ltd. |
|
16. |
Ballymoe, County Galway |
Ballymoe Community Development |
|
17. |
Kilmeedy, County Limerick |
Kilmeady Community Development Group |
Another 12 former Garda stations are being retained for State use and the list of these follows. It is quite interesting to note the number of Garda stations that are being used by the State for a variety of alternate purposes.
|
No. |
Name of Station |
State Body/ Local Authority |
|
1. |
Kill, County Kildare |
South West Kildare Partnership |
|
2. |
Stradone, County Cavan |
Retained by An Garda Síochána for a specialist unit. |
|
3. |
Valentia, County Kerry |
Assigned to the Irish Coast Guard Service. |
|
4. |
Whitehall, Dublin |
Assigned to the State Pathologist and Dublin City Coroner. |
|
5. |
Harcourt Terrace, Dublin |
Currently licensed to five arts bodies. Future use by the Department of Education and Skills to develop a school. |
|
6. |
Killaloe, County Clare |
Killaloe/Ballina Family Resource Centre |
|
7. |
MacCurtain Street, Cork |
Agreement reached with Cork City Council. |
|
8. |
Barrack Street, Cork |
Agreement reached with Cork City Council. |
|
9. |
Mary Street, Limerick |
For transfer to Limerick City Council. |
|
10. |
Edward Street, Limerick |
For transfer to Limerick City Council. |
|
11. |
Loughglynn, County Roscommon |
Transfer to the HSE for use as an ambulance base. |
|
12. |
Ballina, County Mayo |
Engaging with Mayo County Council for development |
No former Garda stations closed in 2012 have reopened as operational Garda stations. The OPW has retained three former Garda stations in Dublin for their strategic value and has entered into a pilot guardianship arrangement in respect of the properties located at Dalkey, Stepaside and Kill of the Grange. Ten former Garda stations in the south east will be auctioned in March or April, with a further ten in the mid-west to be auctioned in the second quarter of this year. The OPW is preparing the legal background work on a further 20 former Garda stations with a view to their going on the market in the third quarter of 2015.
Will the Minister of State clarify whether the proceeds from the various sales were put into the Central Fund or did the OPW retain them? Will he explain what the guardianship arrangement to which he referred involves? Does it involve caretaking duties? How many former Garda stations remain to be dealt with, and have any difficulties been identified regarding the titles to these properties, which might have burdens on them as a result of their physical locations?
The proceeds from the sale of these former Garda stations went into general Exchequer funds. However, we have made a number available to community groups. There are not any problems with regard to titles of which I am aware but I will forward a note to the Deputy on that matter. I will also send him further details on the guardianship situation. For the Deputy's information, there are 139 former Garda stations in total, 17 of which have been assigned to community groups, 12 have been retained for State use, three are the subject of guardianship arrangements, which are essentially caretaking arrangements, 15 were sold by public auction in 2014, six were sold by private treaty in 2014 - those which I referred to as being sale agreed, a further 40 have been identified for disposal in 2015, 24 are vacant but people are living in the occupied married quarters, nine are leased properties and obviously we are seeking to surrender those leases, and 13 are earmarked for disposal in the future.
