Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 4 Mar 2015

Vol. 870 No. 2

Topical Issue Debate

Seniors Alert Scheme

Sometimes when a Topical Issue matter is put down, it may not be clear what is being requested. In this instance we are looking for further and urgent consultation between the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, community groups and Muintir na Tíre on the seniors alert scheme. I am raising this matter on foot of serious concerns and reservations I have received from local communities regarding the move to transfer the administration of the scheme to Pobal.

The scheme, as it stands, is for the supply, delivery, installation and warranty of telecare equipment related to elderly and vulnerable people, equipment such as personal alarms and so-called panic buttons. The majority of the community organisations registered with the senior alerts scheme are community councils, community alert groups and neighbourhood watch groups. They have played a major role in caring for the elderly members of their communities. The transfer of the seniors alert scheme from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to Pobal has caused much concern among the voluntary community which administers the scheme on the ground, however. Muintir na Tíre has also expressed concerns regarding the lack of proper engagement with the current service providers and stakeholders prior to the announcement of the tender.

I have been contacted by community groups all over the county, and they have each told a similar story. This tender was announced without any consultation and its terms cast into real doubt the continued excellent level of service provided by community groups and service providers. I and my colleagues are asking that this process be put on hold in order to allow for proper in-depth engagement with community groups and service providers.

If I may interject, it is my understanding from Deputy Ellis that he contends there are two minutes each for himself and Deputy Ryan. If Deputy Ryan could conclude in the next few seconds.

We need to protect these people and ensure that the quality of service and after care for the telecare systems are not compromised.

There is serious concern about the present plan to transfer the security alert scheme to Pobal. This scheme, by all accounts administered in an efficient and cost-efficient way through community and voluntary groups since 1996, has stood the test of time. There are hundreds of community and voluntary groups registered under it. There are approximately seven or eight companies as well as around 15 to 20 alarm companies involved. One company has 30,000 connections across the country. The new tendering process envisaged would limit this company and others to tendering for three areas out of the ten that Pobal has identified. This would inevitably lead to job losses in areas of maintenance, repairs, monitoring and supply. There is a huge risk that prices will increase and standards will fall. With over 150,000 customers, Pobal will be denying existing companies their ability to tender in a fair and equitable way, with no guarantee they would even win one of them.

Relationships have also been built up with elderly people and other groups. What consultations took place? Were existing businesses, community groups, suppliers and, most importantly, the consumers consulted? Is this another cost-cutting exercise? If so, lives could be put at risk if standards fall. Pobal has no experience in this area. Standards in alarms and what they do vary. Some are quite sophisticated, monitoring movement, smoke levels, carbon monoxide, medicine reminders, fall detections, and bed occupancy. We need to place a hold on this and consult further because I do not believe this is in the interests of the people. Any person or group I have spoken to has said that the system has worked well. Why do we need to do this?

My Department manages the seniors alert scheme, SAS, which encourages community support for vulnerable older people in our communities by providing grant assistance towards the purchase and installation of personal monitored alarms to enable older persons over the age of 65 and of limited means to continue to live securely in their homes with confidence, independence and peace of mind. The scheme is administered by local community and voluntary groups with the support of my Department. The maximum grant per beneficiary for equipment is €250 in respect of monitored personal alarms with pendant and €50 in respect of an additional pendant or re-installation. The annual monitoring costs, generally between €60 and €80, are borne by the beneficiary.

I am glad to say that from 2010 to the end of 2014, in excess of 41,000 people have benefited from the scheme at a total cost of €11 million. I have maintained the allocation for the seniors alert scheme in 2015 at €2.35 million, and that level of funding is sufficient to meet current demand levels for this important scheme. It is not a cost-cutting exercise.

Following the review of the old community support for older people scheme, CSOP, the forerunner for the seniors alert scheme, one of the key recommendations was that a centralised procurement process would simplify the scheme. By decreasing the level of administration for groups, this would allow them to spend more time on the key aim of the scheme, which is more and better interaction with older persons and would also achieve value for money through economies of scale. The Department undertook to consider new approaches to the seniors alert scheme in 2014 and arising from this it was decided that the scheme would be managed by Pobal.

Pobal's management and administrative services for the scheme included an invitation to tender for the supply and installation of personal monitored alarms, which was publicly advertised on eTenders on 20 October 2014. A panel of regional suppliers will be contracted to provide the equipment within specified regional areas while maintaining the benefits of local service provision. The tender process, which is being led by Pobal, is almost complete. As the market for the equipment is well established, it was neither necessary nor appropriate to engage in consultations with the market on the matter prior to the tender process.

Following discussion and advice from procurement consultants and input from my Department, it was agreed that the procurement would be split in two parts. The first part is equipment procurement. A three-year framework agreement for the direct procurement of the SAS equipment, that is the alarm units, was published in October 2014. A series of minimum quality standards, based on research from the National Standards Authority of Ireland, NSAI, Private Security Authority and various agencies in both the UK and Ireland, were set as part of this tender. The tender was broken down into ten regional lots to ensure that SMEs were not disadvantaged due to excessively large sizes. This is pursuant to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform Circular 10/14. There will be a panel of suppliers chosen in each regional lot. These suppliers will be ranked and the first supplier will be the supplier of choice for all local organisations in the lot unless they cannot meet the demand, whereby the next ranked supplier will then be chosen to supply the equipment. These rankings will be reviewed annually and poor performance can result in demotion in the panel. The choice of suppliers will be managed by Pobal to meet public procurement rules.

The second part of procurement is monitoring services. A voluntary monitoring services advisory panel was published via eTenders in October 2014. The purpose of this panel is to inform the beneficiaries of the level of costs and service associated with various suppliers' monitoring services. Entrants to this panel will need to meet a series of minimum quality standards to ensure that the older person is getting a good quality of service. I must emphasise that the use of this panel is voluntary and the older person can choose to continue with their existing monitoring company or can choose any supplier to provide this service. Entrance to this panel is on a rolling basis over the course of 2015.

I thank the Minister of State. Her script has been distributed. Deputy Ryan has one minute to ask a supplementary question.

Other Deputies such as Deputy Michael Moynihan of Fianna Fáil, Deputy Tony McLoughlin of Fine Gael and also Deputy Michael Creed have received similar communications and share our concerns. This is a genuine cross-party call to the Department and to the Minister of State. We all share the concerns of the community groups that are dealing with this on the ground. They are the experts and they feel they have not been consulted properly. Efforts need to be made to facilitate real consultation on this matter in order, perhaps, to amend the terms of the tender to protect what is good and what works in the current scheme.

The big question is, what is the objective of the change? What is it supposed to achieve? The scheme works well as it is and the customers are very happy. What problem is the Department trying to solve? It is not clear. I ask the Minister of State to respond positively to this genuine cross-party request to consult with all stakeholders before bringing the current tendering process to a conclusion. It is important to listen and respond to the concerns of the customers of the scheme and the community groups that have played such an important role in making it a success.

I reiterate Deputy Ryan's point that this is an all-party request. We have received representations across the board from various people, including the people who avail of the service. Is the Minister of State aware that the companies currently engaged in this have collectively paid back more in VAT than the €2.3 million allocated to the scheme? The Minister of State has said this would promote more SME participation. What about the existing SMEs and the jobs and services they provide?

The Minister of State said it was not a cost-cutting exercise. There will be ten regional lots but if one can only tender for three and if one has 30,000 customers spread across the country, then one is limited and jobs will be lost. It will have a very serious impact. The Minister of State did not answer the question properly in terms of engagement with the different bodies, customers and suppliers. She said that in some cases it was not necessary. I do not accept that and believe they should have been consulted.

Over the next 30 years, the number of people in Ireland over the age of 65 is predicted to double to between 1.3 million and 1.4 million while the number over 80 is expected to quadruple to about 440,000. The Government recognises that quality of life and enabling older people to live life to the full at every stage will become increasingly important as the numbers of older people increase. The fact that more people are living for longer is to be celebrated and is one of the great successes of our age.

Research has shown that loneliness and isolation have a significant impact on the health and well-being of our older people. The risk factor involved in loneliness is as significant as smoking and greater than obesity. Unlike other schemes, applications under the seniors alert scheme do not come directly from the beneficiary but instead from the local community and voluntary groups. A key benefit of the scheme is the interaction between the beneficiary and the local groups which have a track record of working with, or providing services to, older people within their communities. The community group and the beneficiary enter into an informal social contract to remain in touch for a period of at least five years. This scheme has benefitted 90,000 older people at a total cost of some €32 million over the past ten years. Not only is it a fine example of preventative spend, it also improves the well-being of our valuable older citizens.

The operational hand-over between my Department and Pobal is proceeding and should be completed in June of this year. In the meantime, community and voluntary groups wishing to participate and draw down grant support under the seniors alert scheme can apply to my Department in the usual way. Pobal proposes to host a number of regional information sessions to assist local community groups in the transition to the new scheme. The regional information sessions will highlight any new processes and the benefits of the new approach. It will give the local organisations an opportunity to engage with Pobal staff and address any concerns they may have.

It is important to note that my Department will retain responsibility for the strategic policy direction of the scheme. It will also have an oversight role in regard to Pobal's delivery of the scheme and will ensure that the valuable community support for elderly persons provided by the many hundreds of community and voluntary groups across the country will be maintained.

Assassination of Boris Nemtsov

I am very glad the Minister of State, Deputy Deenihan, is here to take this issue. I was appalled to learn of the brutal murder of Boris Nemtsov last weekend, as were the overwhelming majority of the Irish people. Mr. Nemtsov was a prominent opposition politician in Russia and his RPR Parnas political party is a member of ALDE, the same political grouping to which Fianna Fáil is affiliated at a European level.

Over the course of his life, Mr. Nemtsov worked to speak up for the most marginalised in Russian society. He was a committed democrat who fought to strengthen the political institutions in Russia and he highlighted the scourge of corruption at every opportunity. In recent months, he had also been an outspoken critic of the conflict in Ukraine, which has claimed so many innocent lives. The murder of Boris Nemtsov must also act as a warning sign to all people who believe in liberal democracy in Europe and in Russia. It is evidence that all is not well with the political system in Moscow.

The increasing Russian aggression towards its neighbours and internally towards political opponents is a most frightening development. From what we see and listen to through the media reports, there appears to be an increasing culture of fear in Russia. State authorities are said to act in an exceptionally partisan way in how law and order are maintained and in how laws are implemented. It seems the regime in Moscow is exhibiting increasingly fascist-like tendencies, where state and party merge into one and where some opponents are even forced to leave the country.

We are all aware of the desperate carnage with the loss of life of so many innocent people and we think of one particular incident alone, the shooting down of the civilian aircraft MH19, resulting in the death of 298 innocent people. I mention that in the context of the current Russian foreign policy that has resulted in war in Ukraine with untold devastation and the undermining of that country's sovereignty. As a Parliament we should be very conscious of the sovereignty of other nations.

The West has responded with sanctions which have had an impact but which have not provided a long-term solution. Even Ireland, a country which has traditionally had a distinctly cordial relationship with Russia, has been touched by this aggression through the infringement of Irish-controlled airspace by Russian military aircraft. This, we have learned, resulted in commercial traffic having to be diverted or suspended when travelling to and from Irish airports. The Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, need to take up this issue directly with their counterparts in the Russian Government. I know from Question Time last week that the Minister had instructed senior officials in his Department to meet the Russian ambassador and senior officials in the Russian embassy. However, at this stage, with another recorded infringement of Irish-controlled airspace, it is time for the Minister and the Minister of State to raise this matter directly with the Russian authorities and to state very clearly that any infringement of Irish-controlled airspace is not acceptable.

I thank Deputy Smith for raising this important matter. In the early hours of last Saturday morning, a prominent Russian opposition leader, Boris Nemtsov, was shot dead in central Moscow. His murder was a brutal and cowardly act which was met with widespread shock and disbelief. My colleague, the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, has expressed his deep sadness at Mr. Nemtsov's death and extended his sympathies to his family.

Tributes have poured in for Mr. Nemtsov since his death. He served his country with distinction in many roles, including as former Deputy Russian Prime Minister under President Yeltsin. Mr. Nemtsov was a courageous champion of democratic reforms and a strong advocate for a more open and tolerant Russia. His loss will be deeply felt not just in Russia but around the world.

The high regard in which Mr. Nemtsov was held was evident by the large crowd which attended a vigil in his honour on Sunday. Some 50,000 people turned out to mourn his loss and honour his life. While the vigil march included a wide range of political parties and movements, the attendance of so many ordinary Russia citizens was notable. Their presence in such numbers was a tribute to his legacy as a fearless reformer who was not afraid to speak out against the direction that Russia was taking and the policies being pursued by the current government. Large numbers of mourners also attended his memorial service yesterday. As was the case with most other EU member states, Ireland was represented at the service by our ambassador to Russia.

Mr. Nemtsov's murder highlighted the vulnerability of opposition figures in Russia currently, where any form of criticism of the government is seen as an act of disloyalty. He had been a vocal critic of Russia's actions against Ukraine. In fact, the vigil on Sunday in honour of Mr. Nemtsov replaced an opposition demonstration which he had been instrumental in organising to protest against the economic crisis and Russia's role in the destabilisation of Ukraine.

President Putin has condemned the killing. His spokesperson said that the President had written to Mr. Nemtsov's mother promising that he would personally oversee the investigation into her son's murder. Many theories are in circulation as to the motives for Mr. Nemtsov's murder. For this reason, it is all the more important that the Russian authorities promptly conduct a full and transparent investigation into his killing and that the perpetrators of this callous crime are brought to justice.

There should be no culture of impunity in the face of such an appalling deed. It is also important that the rights to freedom of assembly and expression that Mr. Nemtsov fought so fearlessly to defend are recognised and fully protected.

I thank the Minister of State for his response. As a society, we need better relations with Russia on a political, social and economic basis, which would be to the benefit of both countries and the European Union. There is great potential to grow trade for the benefit of Ireland, the European Union and Russia. However, there is one thing from which the European Union and this country cannot flinch, that is, being strong advocates of the need for democratic reforms in Russia and, as the late Mr. Nemtsov was, being active as a strong advocate for a more open and tolerant Russia. What we have seen in recent times is not acceptable. The Government, at head of Government and ministerial level, must convey in the strongest possible manner to the Russian authorities that what has been happening is not acceptable. There must be no stone left unturned to bring to justice those who carried out the hideous murder of an excellent man who was doing important political work in difficult circumstances.

The most important lesson we can learn from the brutal killing of Mr. Nemtsov is that we can no longer ignore what is happening in Russia. We can no longer say it has no impact on us. We can no longer turn a blind eye when another political opponent of the current regime is silenced or when more innocent victims are killed in Ukraine or elsewhere. We have seen recent reports on concerns in some of the other Baltic countries, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Norway has also expressed concerns about Russian aggression. The Government and our partners in the European Union must say loud and clear that this is not acceptable and that if Russia continues these actions, we will not tolerate them. That message must be sent clearly to President Putin and his government. We cannot pretend that the Russian Government and President are our allies. Carrying out actions that have the characteristics of enemy actions makes a state an enemy. A change in policy by President Putin and his government is needed to build better relations with the European Union and the rest of the world. What happened last weekend was an appalling attack on an innocent man which resulted in the loss of life. It was also an attack on democracy.

As I noted in my opening statement, the murder of Boris Nemtsov was an appalling act, one which must be fully and effectively investigated. A failure to find and prosecute Mr. Nemtsov's killers would raise serious questions about Russia's criminal justice system. A culture of impunity must not be allowed to develop in Russia and cannot be tolerated. In remarks on behalf of all EU member states at yesterday's memorial service the head of the EU delegation to Russia said Mr. Nemtsov had personified values that we held dear: respect for human dignity, a commitment to democracy, a strong civil society and the need for authorities to be publicly accountable. Defending and promoting these fundamental values is becoming increasingly difficult in Russia. Developments in recent years in terms of political pluralism and civil liberties have been disappointing. Although our perspectives may sometimes differ, it is important that we continue to engage with Russia in all areas, including political pluralism, the role of civil society and civil liberties generally.

Social Welfare Offices

I raise this important issue about the retention of Department of Social Protection jobs in Ballybay, County Monaghan. Ballybay is a small town, with a population of 1,500 people, and the loss of 30 jobs there would be devastating. It would be the equivalent of losing 300 jobs in a town with a population of 15,000 people. This must be taken seriously by the Department of Social Protection and all efforts made to retain the jobs in Ballybay. That is imperative. I am very concerned about the way the Department has handled the issue, the answers emanating from it on how it has conducted a review of the offices in Ballybay and the answer given by the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, to a parliamentary question submitted by my colleague in Cavan-Monaghan, Deputy Brendan Smith.

I am annoyed that five property owners who have offered premises in Ballybay, which would mean the retention of the jobs in the town, have not been given adequate responses from the Department of Social Protection. I spoke to one of them this morning. He submitted his request in time, but he has not been contacted by either the OPW or the Department about his offer to provide adequate space for the Department. He also met the Minister of State with special responsibility for the Office of Public Works, Deputy Simon Harris, before Christmas. He has made it clear that he is prepared to foot any cost to ensure the jobs are retained in the local area, but he has not been afforded the opportunity to provide a quote. The other property owners are in the same position.

This issue must be taken very seriously by the Department of Social Protection. The answer to the parliamentary question suggested the decision had already been made by it. It was believed locally that this was a done deal and that the decision had been made long before the property owners were consulted. Can this issue be revisited? It is of great concern to me, people in my constituency and those working in the Department of Social Protection in Ballybay that adequate consideration is not being given to these alternative proposals. There is adequate space in Ballybay to retain the jobs in the town. At the last meeting it was made clear that if there were new jobs to come in terms of a public service card, it could be done either in Ballybay or elsewhere. There is no need for the jobs currently located in Ballybay to be moved elsewhere.

It is welcome that we have a new Minister of State with special responsibility for rural economic development, but I am concerned that the Department of Social Protection is not taking the issue of rural development seriously. I have no issue with jobs being moved to another rural town, but why should a small rural town, in which these jobs have been located for over 30 years, be treated in this way when there are people who are prepared to put their money on the line to retain the jobs in the area? It is a retrograde step. It looks very bad from the Government's perspective and from that of the Department that adequate consideration is not being given to the various offers made.

I also spoke to the county council which had offered the Department Monaghan town council offices for issuing the public service card. The council has not been consulted adequately either. Its offer also seems to have been ignored.

It is welcome that the 30 jobs are located in Ballybay and it is important that they be retained there. It is also welcome that the Department of Social Protection has stated it wants to create more jobs, but they can be adequately sourced, resourced and facilitated in Ballybay which is in the centre of the county and within easy reach of all parts of the county. In a previous response from a departmental official I was told there was no adequate public transport service available. That is a failure of the Government which needs to provide a proper public transport system throughout rural Ireland. It is a lame excuse. This issue must be revisited.

The Minister of State is present. He has said he is looking at the issue and I look forward to hearing his formal reply. This issue will not go away. It is believed locally that adequate consideration has not been given to the offers made.

I acknowledge the Deputy's concerns. He has worked extremely hard on this issue.

The 29 staff in two adjoining buildings on the main street of Ballybay, County Monaghan were redeployed from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to the Department of Social Protection in July 2012. They are engaged in the processing of public service cards.

The card is intended to enable individuals to gain access to public services more efficiently and with a minimum of duplication of effort, while preserving their privacy to the maximum extent possible. It has been designed to replace other cards in the public sector such as the free travel pass and the social services card and to make it easy for providers of public services to verify the identity of customers. The project is a key initiative in the public service reform plan, with the aim being to expand the use of the card to cover a greater range of services. Card registration is being expanded to encompass all departmental scheme customers and, over time, the adult population of Ireland.

The card operations in Ballybay have been expanded to include eight additional temporary staff. The two current buildings are in separate ownership and, unfortunately, poor condition and not considered appropriate for the existing business processes or future operational requirements. In this context, the Office of Public Works, OPW, has been working to identify alternative locations to which the functions could be relocated. The OPW has investigated all of the options in Ballybay and inspected a number of properties with a view to adapting buildings to meet the Department of Social Protection's requirements. I have been informed that a significant investment would be required to bring the proposed properties up to modern standards. In addition, other technical surveys and reports, planning permissions, fire certification and physical works would take approximately one year to complete. Unfortunately, this timeframe does not meet the Department's business requirements. It was decided that the properties on offer in Ballybay could not meet these requirements in terms of cost and time. In this context, a decision has been made to move the current facilities to Monaghan town where the preferred location is suitable for the services currently located in Ballybay. The location can also facilitate the Department's requirement to establish a public office for the purposes of issuing public service cards to County Monaghan residents. Monaghan is the only county that does not have a customer-facing public service card office.

As far as I am aware, the situation for all Departments is the same, in that we inform the OPW of our requirements and it sources properties. I stated this at my meetings with local Deputies and councillors. The OPW was given specifications, but I will not interfere in the sourcing. Information was sent to me on suitable buildings, including by the Deputy, and it was passed on to the OPW for investigation. The OPW reported and perhaps the Deputy might raise the issue with it. My role is not to lobby for any particular office in Ballybay. It would be preferable to keep the services there, but that is what was included in the report that was returned to us.

The Minister of State may not be aware of something. I was informed this morning by county council officials and the property owners that they had not had proper engagement with the OPW on a number of the proposals. Two of the owners have committed to spending whatever money is required to ensure jobs are retained in Ballybay. They are honourable people and want it to be made clear to the public in the area and the Department that they, rather than the Department, would incur the costs necessary to bring the buildings up to modern standards. They should be offered the opportunity to do this. Before Christmas they asked for the Department's requirements in order that they might carry out the works. The works could have been started three or four months ago had the Department engaged with the property owners. It is important for the people of County Monaghan - my constituents - that the jobs be retained in the area. Ballybay is the centre point of Monaghan and the public offices there are easily accessible from all areas of the county. Thirty jobs in a small town like Ballybay are vital to the enhancement of rural Ireland. What is the point of public investment if it does not enhance the regional spread of development? The private sector will always veer towards larger population centres, but the public service should target areas where the private sector cannot provide investment. This is balanced regional development and where the Department should be focusing its attention. The idea that it would somehow not be advantageous to have a public office in Ballybay is false.

The Minister of State should return to the senior Minister and re-engage on the issue, as the way this issue has been handled is unacceptable. It needs to be dealt with properly and there needs to be honest engagement with the local community and all five property owners so as to ensure they are given an adequate opportunity to put their proposals to the Department. A value for money audit would be advantageous from the Department's perspective. The owners are prepared to incur the costs. That is their point. The argument that it would cost the Department money is untrue. It would simply rent the building from an owner.

There is far more to this issue than the building that is currently occupied which we all accept is unsuitable, particularly for the expanded service. There is also the question of planning permission and fire certificates. I met the local public representatives and agreed to make a request to the OPW to hold off on signing any lease for premises in Monaghan town. This allowed representatives and officials to propose alternatives in Ballybay.

I do not have the answers to many of the Deputy's questions, as they are within the remit of the OPW which we commissioned to source the premises for us. On foot of my meeting with several Deputies from the locality, I requested the OPW not to sign any lease. That did not happen and there was a further investigation. If the Deputy has an issue with the level of engagement between the OPW and local businesses, he must raise the matter with the OPW.

Top
Share